View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Integrating Curriculum: A Case Study of Teaching Global Education

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Integrating Curriculum: A Case Study of Teaching Global Education
Language: English
Authors: Ferguson-Patrick, Kate, Reynolds, Ruth, Macqueen, Suzanne
Source: European Journal of Teacher Education. 2018 41(2):187-201.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 15
Publication Date: 2018
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Descriptors: Global Education, Teaching Methods, Integrated Curriculum, Case Studies, Curriculum Implementation, Preservice Teachers, Teaching Experience, National Standards, Guidelines, Curriculum Evaluation, Accreditation (Institutions), Student Surveys, Educational Policy, Policy Analysis, Foreign Countries
Geographic Terms: Australia
DOI: 10.1080/02619768.2018.1426565
ISSN: 0261-9768
Abstract: Despite widespread support for integrated approaches to teaching, classroom practice reveals a lack of implementation. This paper explores challenges and opportunities in teaching an integrated curriculum, and connects this with the contemporary notion of a twenty-first century curriculum and pedagogy. A case study of Global Education (GE) is used to delineate the complexity of issues when teachers attempt to move beyond disciplinary-based teaching approaches. We examine curriculum documents, advice for teachers on curriculum implementation, preservice teachers' experiences in schools during Professional Experiences and national guidelines for Professional Experience. Through these data, a broad picture emerges of influences on integrating curricula in classrooms. Opportunities to integrate curriculum incorporating twenty-first century pedagogies were limited by pressures on teachers with preservice teachers rarely exposed to authentic integration. Teachers' professional standing requires clear guidelines, which allow them to pursue important twenty-first century content and skills, for young citizens and this must begin in preservice education.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 50
Entry Date: 2018
Accession Number: EJ1170442
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFzDzr_83j1VI9RC84MyktuAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDKoFmMYSPq1bVab6swIBEICBmp_ILFvtV2TNe2SH_4KfzSvnha4QZvD1i3d5Vat6hywJSKVFjDqjzKH-kxxDpJVZdti1dZyLQ3r_A9-Tk0cmfS4NWzE_jh9G0AomkTPvQWoupPJSea3wzQu0XsY_YTlzWYOjVnjuCFeuYdfyDLu84kmgJUnzC4k1__HODDl8pMtKz4sA1mYheWfeCWvmVHdQNccYrdDVaXCQI4w=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0127842128;54n01apr.18;2019Jan09.07:54;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0127842128-1">Integrating curriculum: a case study of teaching Global Education. </title> <p>Despite widespread support for integrated approaches to teaching, classroom practice reveals a lack of implementation. This paper explores challenges and opportunities in teaching an integrated curriculum, and connects this with the contemporary notion of a twenty-first century curriculum and pedagogy. A case study of Global Education (GE) is used to delineate the complexity of issues when teachers attempt to move beyond disciplinary-based teaching approaches. We examine curriculum documents, advice for teachers on curriculum implementation, preservice teachers' experiences in schools during Professional Experiences and national guidelines for Professional Experience. Through these data, a broad picture emerges of influences on integrating curricula in classrooms. Opportunities to integrate curriculum incorporating twenty-first century pedagogies were limited by pressures on teachers with preservice teachers rarely exposed to authentic integration. Teachers' professional standing requires clear guidelines, which allow them to pursue important twenty-first century content and skills , for young citizens and this must begin in preservice education.</p> <p>Keywords: Integrating curriculum; Global Education; teacher education curriculum; professional experience; twenty-first century pedagogies</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Teacher education (TE) programmes are responsible for developing teachers equipped to educate children in and for a 'world of supercomplexity' (Ling [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref1">34</reflink>], 10). The TE curriculum includes what to teach (syllabus content) and how to teach it (pedagogy), supported by extensive theoretical underpinnings, and ideally supported through substantial, quality, school-based professional (or clinical) experiences (Darling-Hammond [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref2">21</reflink>]). In Australia and elsewhere, there is an increasing emphasis on the quality of teachers and teacher preparation, evidenced through a focus on (among other things) professional teaching standards (AITSL [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref3">7</reflink>]) and teacher performance assessment (AITSL [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref4">9</reflink>]; Darling-Hammond [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref5">22</reflink>]). Teacher actions in classrooms are therefore ultimately influenced, if not controlled, by a combination of professional teaching standards and syllabus documents. However, in the case of Global Education teacher educators are often sceptical of infusing extra global competencies in 'an already crowded curriculum driven by standards and accreditation' (Kopish [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref6">32</reflink>], 24). In this paper we examine how the combination of professional teaching standards and syllabus documents affects the practice of integrating curriculum content in Global Education in Australian schools in a case study.</p> <p>Implementing an integrated curriculum in the classroom can be challenging in an educational environment where discipline knowledge is being individually assessed using standardised tests like NAPLAN (National Assessment Programme – Literacy and Numeracy [Australia]) and PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment [OECD]) and teachers are concerned about 'covering' the required curriculum outcomes. In the past 10 years there has been an upsurge of interest in teaching twenty-first century skills, which are often open ended (Ananiadou and Claro [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref7">5</reflink>]), but at the same time emphasis on high stakes testing has meant that teachers have increasingly been fearful of deviating from curriculum guidelines. In primary/elementary schools this has meant large amounts of time spent on literacy and numeracy usually taught as discrete units (Gresnigt et al. [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref8">27</reflink>]). Polesel, Rice, and Dulfer ([<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref9">42</reflink>]) argued that the curriculum thus taught runs the risk of being reduced in both depth and in breadth when such an increasingly competitive and individualistic approach to teaching is taken. In fact they point to research from Au (2008) who argued that teachers who address the challenges of high stakes testing in this manner limit students' range of skills and literacies needed in the modern world. The Australian curriculum in fact advocates for cross disciplinary or integrated learning:</p> <p>Rather than being self-contained or fixed, disciplines are interconnected, dynamic and growing. A discipline-based curriculum should allow for cross-disciplinary learning that broadens and enriches each student's learning. (ACARA, May [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref10">2</reflink>], 20)</p> <p>Integrated curriculum initiatives have also been strongly linked to more recent educational rhetoric around twenty-first century learning. As Kereluik et al. ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref11">31</reflink>]) pointed out, the overriding justification for this new way of looking at knowledge (twenty-first century knowledge) was technological modernisation and globalisation with a resultant increased emphasis on communication skills, metacognitive processes, engaging with complex texts and complex problem solving; as well as developing a world focus in a disciplinary and cross-disciplinary manner (Boix-Mansilla and Jackson [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref12">14</reflink>]). In this paper we use the cross-disciplinary concept of Global Education (GE) to explore current challenges to teaching in an integrated manner, in a context where teachers perceive a conflict between requirements for teaching for 'good' results in high stakes testing regimes and the rhetoric around teaching twenty-first century skills. In many western education systems there is little emphasis on integrating global perspectives into TE courses, (Varadharajan and Buchanan [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref13">52</reflink>]) so in considering how the competing demands of systemic and professional policies and processes affected the curriculum and teachers' work, our research questions became:</p> <p>How do teacher accreditation, policy and syllabus documents influence the integration of Global Education in the school curriculum?</p> <p>What teaching of integrated curriculum, using Global Education themes, do preservice teachers see in schools?</p> <p>What teaching of integrated curriculum, using Global Education themes, do preservice teachers conduct in schools?</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-3">Integrated curriculum</hd> <p>Although advocates for an integrated curriculum such as Dewey ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref14">24</reflink>]) have been with us for many years particularly in primary/elementary schools, there have been mixed messages as to the success of the practice. This may be due to some confusion about the different forms integration can take, a lack of empirical data as to the outcomes of such integration, and the need for clarification of the various expectations anticipated from such integration. Each of these is investigated below. Defining an integrated curriculum is a difficult task as it is subject to many different types of application. Gresnigt et al. ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref15">27</reflink>]) undertook a systematic review of research (including a focus group of researchers and teacher educators) which investigated the integration of science and technology in primary/elementary schools. They identified six ways in which the curriculum could be considered integrated; Isolated/cellular/fragmented; Connected/aware; Nested/fused; Multidisciplinary; Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary (Gresnigt et al. [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref16">27</reflink>], 52). However Beane ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref17">13</reflink>]) and more recent advocates Rennie, Venville, and Wallace ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref18">44</reflink>]) argued that true curriculum integration required planning around real-life problems and issues, applying content and skills from many disciplines and so aspects of the curriculum were taught and learned when they were needed.</p> <p>Reasons for integrating curriculum are many and varied. A century ago, Dewey suggested that integration of ideas from different disciplines would allow students to see the relevance of ideas and hence they would more likely appreciate their schooling (Dewey [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref19">24</reflink>]). In recent educational practice the use of ICT has meant that this new teaching strategy and way of thinking has to be incorporated into common teaching episodes, but the twenty-first century focus on authentic learning has also promoted heightened attention to curriculum integration (Ananiadou and Claro [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref20">5</reflink>]). However, despite decades of advocacy for integrating curriculum there are few research studies that provide definitive outcomes for such integration. Gresnigt et al. ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref21">27</reflink>]) used published research on the benefits of integrated curriculum to assess different forms of integration and found that the teacher's role in undertaking innovation, such as integrating curriculum in a sophisticated manner, is crucial. Focusing on the teacher role, they found that the more complex forms of integration were most successful in keeping teacher motivation. Addressing real life issues, such as the form advocated by Beane ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref22">13</reflink>]), also seemed to ensure more success. Likewise Rennie, Venville, and Wallace ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref23">44</reflink>]) argued that integrated curriculum enables transfer of knowledge focuses on the learner and relevant material, and is thus more motivating for learners.</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-4">Integrating Global Education</hd> <p>Current interest in twenty-first century educational skills has encouraged renewed interest in more sophisticated forms of curriculum integration and led to further forms of assessment of integrated outcomes. Unfortunately, high stakes testing has also become more prevalent in educational discourse and to some extent the two compete with each other. Lingard points to research showing how high-stakes testing can have 'potentially negative effects on pedagogies and curricula' (Lingard [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref24">35</reflink>], 130). To provide further clarification as to how exactly classroom pedagogy and curricula are influenced by twenty-first century pedagogies aimed at integration, we undertook a case study of the integration of GE.</p> <p>The term Global Education (GE) means different things to different people and there has been longstanding discussion about how to define it, and how best to teach it (Subedi [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref25">49</reflink>]). Terms such as development education, peace education, global citizenship education, international education and multicultural education are often used interchangeably in connection with global education, without critique (Zong, Wilson, and Quashiga [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref26">54</reflink>]). Many teachers see their role as assisting students to consider the global challenges they will face, and it is evident that students are concerned about global issues (Hicks and Holden [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref27">28</reflink>]; Hutchinson [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref28">29</reflink>]). Despite a crowded curriculum and the emphasis on testing in so many countries (McNeil [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref29">38</reflink>]), teachers strive to give GE the commitment it deserves.</p> <p>The <emph>Global Perspectives Framework for Australian schools</emph> (Curriculum Corporation [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref30">20</reflink>]), developed by the Commonwealth of Australia, in conjunction with AusAID; the Global Education Project; the Curriculum Corporation, and the Asia Education Foundation, lists five key learning emphases reflecting themes in GE as: <emph>Interdependence and Globalisation, Identity and Cultural Diversity, Social Justice and Human Rights, Peace Building and Conflict Resolution, and Sustainable Futures.</emph> All five learning emphases are interdisciplinary in both content and pedagogy and so provide direction for an interdisciplinary approach to teaching in Australia. As pointed out by Brown and Weber (2016) there is a need to develop and enable 'local social actors' who can respond to various institutional demands in a high stakes teaching and learning environment, while also engaging in learning experiences that reflect students' linguistic, cultural, socioeconomic, and political worlds. These teachers are also what our preservice teachers need as professional experience mentors (Darling-Hammond [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref31">21</reflink>]). However, in this same exact context a new emphasis on more competitive ways of learning with a focus on the individual (in response to the increase of high stakes testing) (Angus [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref32">6</reflink>]; Brand and Triplett [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref33">16</reflink>]; Polesel, Rice, and Dulfer [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref34">42</reflink>]; Reay and Wiliam [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref35">43</reflink>]; Thompson and Harbaugh [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref36">51</reflink>]) has limited the range of pedagogies. We now turn to examining Australian curriculum documents to clarify how this quandary has been addressed.</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-5">Global perspectives in the Australian curriculum</hd> <p>The Australian Curriculum discipline-based learning content is organised into seven areas (English, mathematics and so on) from Foundation to Year 6 – the Primary/Elementary years of schooling (the area of schooling we focus on for this paper). There are also three cross curriculum priorities (and interdisciplinary focuses) to be addressed, these being Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures; Asia and Australia's Engagement with Asia; and Sustainability. There are also seven general capabilities (interdisciplinary) interspersed into these syllabi, these being Literacy; Numeracy; Information and Communication Technology Capability; Critical and Creative Thinking; Personal and Social Capability; Ethical Understanding as well as Intercultural Understanding<emph>.</emph> However, curriculum documents are not very explicit about how to incorporate either the priorities or the capabilities in classroom practice, or to focus on GE despite quite a lot of rhetoric about this. The new Australian Curriculum (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref37">1</reflink>]), was guided by the <emph>Shape of the Australian Curriculum (National Curriculum Board</emph>[<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref38">39</reflink>]<emph>)</emph> and reflects the position adopted in the <emph>Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians</emph> (MCEETYA (Ministerial Council on Education Employment Training & Youth Affairs) [MCEETYA] [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref39">37</reflink>]). This declaration states: that we should develop</p> <p>responsible global and local citizens ...and enable active and informed citizens who... are able to relate to and communicate across cultures, especially the cultures and countries of Asia; work for the common good, in particular sustaining and improving natural and social environments; [and] are responsible global and local citizens. (MCEETYA [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref40">37</reflink>], 9)</p> <p>There is thus a general consensus that putting Australian curriculum and Australian curriculum practices within a global context is important, yet GE does not appear as a key perspective or key capability in the Australian Curriculum. By inference, we assume that Intercultural Understanding as an integrated capability could imply GE, and the three cross curriculum priorities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures; and Asia and Australia's Engagement with Asia; and Sustainability should certainly be indicative of a GE focus and as such imply integration across discipline areas. We now turn to clarification as to how this integrated curriculum focus is evident in teacher education programmes in the Australian context.</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-6">GE integration in teacher education programmes</hd> <p>Ling ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref41">34</reflink>]) pointed out that Australian teacher education struggles to provide a curriculum to enable teachers to teach in current schooling situations while addressing future schooling. A key issue is simply the diversity of preservice teachers and teacher education programmes. There are currently 400 accredited Initial Teacher Education programmes across 48 providers and there is a great diversity of entrants. This includes a higher percentage than is seen in the general tertiary sector of students from low socio-economic background, regional background, indigenous background and diverse pathways to University (AITSL [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref42">8</reflink>]). There are also financial constraints on programme provision and lack of linkages between universities where teacher education is undertaken, and the problem of the teacher professional community, which tends to be State-based, not nationally based as the curriculum and professional standards are (Reynolds 2014). Teacher accreditation processes, professional standards and curriculum are not linked clearly in the preparation of teachers.</p> <p>The image is one of disjunction and so integration across all these areas becomes more difficult and GE becomes quite elusive. For example, AITSL divides graduate teacher professional standards into Professional Knowledge, Professional Practice and Professional Engagement and one would consider that there is ample opportunity in these to address cross-disciplinary focuses such as GE. To address these components most TE programmes have separate discipline-based courses (to focus on, for example, the mathematics syllabus documents), teaching strategies and skills (to focus on pedagogies specific to mathematics) and also background professional knowledge that incorporates subject specific knowledge plus knowledge of student diversity and requirements (courses covering such content as educational psychology and specific mathematical knowledge). Ideally, every syllabus-based course would address the cross-curriculum priorities, but we should not assume that is the case. Likewise, where is the skill of authentic integration of separate discipline content taught in TE programmes? No doubt there are different approaches in various TE programmes but then you must also address the school experience which is also part of the preservice teacher experience. We decided to focus on one university teacher education programme to clarify the picture.</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-7">Methodology</hd> <p>This article reflects upon data collected from surveys of preservice teachers at one regional University in Australia. Document analysis of policy documents and curriculum statements enabled a triangulated approach, a term first used by Webb et al. ([<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref43">53</reflink>]), to increase the validity of this qualitative research design, and sought to corroborate the data collected from the surveys, as a strategy. This enabled us to hear the voices of preservice teachers, as well as recognise the advice given to these teachers as to how to implement global perspectives in their teaching through policy documents and curriculum guidelines.</p> <p>Our research initially involved an examination of the policy documents and statements to see what advice was given in regards to curriculum integration and the implementation of global perspectives. Firstly we looked at some of the plethora of policies and documents which currently add to the complexity of teachers' work (Le Cornu [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref44">33</reflink>]) including Teaching Standards and Teacher Education programme accreditation documentation in Australia, England and the United States of America (US) in relation to integration of teaching content, catering for diversity, cultural competency and GE. Comparison of these standards shows similar inclusions in Australia (AITSL [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref45">7</reflink>]), England (Department for Education [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref46">23</reflink>]) and the US (InTasc [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref47">30</reflink>]) which we see as evidence of globalisation of the curriculum. We also examined documents concerning the performance of preservice teachers during Professional Experiences. These included documents from the <emph>Great Teaching Inspired Learning</emph> [GTIL] (New South Wales Department of Education [NSW DEC] [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref48">40</reflink>]) project which aims to improve the quality of teaching in the Australian state of New South Wales, where the current study was conducted. Also examined were documents from the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted) in England and Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) in the US. As these documents did not have electronic filters built in, the search was conducted for aspects related to integrated curriculum, cultural competence, catering for diversity and teaching of global issues by reading each document and highlighting relevant content. Again, evidence was grouped into codes and then organised into themes also using NVivo software.</p> <p>After this analysis, we decided to do a deeper textual analysis of the current Australian curriculum syllabi by filtering the syllabi for aspects related to integrated curriculum, cultural competence, catering for diversity and teaching of global issues. The online versions of the Australian Curriculum syllabuses are equipped with a filtering tool, similar to a 'search' function, to enable users to more easily find particular content. We were able to list the 'Intercultural Understanding' capability, as well as the 'Asia and Australia's Engagement with Asia' and 'Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures' priorities, in the filter of each document, so that all content descriptors/items related to these capabilities and priorities were listed (an icon for each capability and priority is assigned to allow this filtering). Then we could examine how they were addressed. We examined content descriptions (which include knowledge, understanding and skills, described at a year level or band of years and which are compulsory) and then elaborations (provided to give teachers ideas about how they might teach the content and which are not compulsory). This triangulated approach ensured that sources of bias were considered by collecting evidence from a variety of methods. The use of multiple data sources helped to clarify and reveal the picture of what was emerging from the data, and the coding checks strengthened the reliability of this emerging picture.</p> <p>We then focussed on the experiences of preservice teachers in schools, building on work in previous studies (Ferguson-Patrick, Reynolds, and Macqueen [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref49">26</reflink>]; Macqueen and Ferguson-Patrick [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref50">36</reflink>]; Reynolds et al. [[<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref51">45</reflink>]]). Preservice Early Childhood and Elementary teachers were surveyed after completion of one of their school-based professional experience. 86 were undergraduate students who had just completed their first such experience of four weeks with a focus on classroom management; and 101 were a mixture of undergraduate and postgraduate students after a course focus on multilevel pedagogies and integrated curriculum. These latter students were in either their 3rd year of the four year undergraduate programme or in the final professional experience course in their two year postgraduate teaching programme and their observations were obtained in a wide range of primary schools. Qualitative surveys provided data on a range of experiences from novice preservice teachers to the most experienced. This survey invited open-ended responses to questions related to GE and teaching. The survey contained some general questions about their age, year of commencement in TE programme and definition of GE. It also had questions focussing on how they felt aspects of their particular course were evident in their teaching of GE on their teaching placements, as well as what they observed their mentor teachers teaching in relation to GE. The focus of this paper is on the questions, which asked these preservice teachers to indicate the topics, and pedagogies related to GE they had seen or taught whilst on their Professional Experiences. The preservice teachers surveyed were familiar with GE topics and pedagogies because of our approach to integrating these perspectives throughout the Teacher Education programme and with the knowledge that we were preparing them for that world of supercomplexity (Ling [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref52">34</reflink>]).</p> <p>The authors coded these observations, using NVivo software, to clarify any GE that was observed and taught and factors the preservice teachers perceived as limiting teaching of GE perspectives. We focussed on responses received that related to GE. An example in Table 1 indicates the way 'culture' was treated in teaching. Evidence was grouped into codes and then organised into themes.</p> <p>Table 1. The Australian Curriculum English subject content descriptors and elaborations for cross curriculum priorities.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><tbody><tr valign="top"><td align="left"><bold>English/Year 1/Literacy/Texts in context/ACELY1655</bold></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left">Content descriptor- Respond to texts drawn from a range of cultures and experiences <bold>(No icon shown linking this to <italic>Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures)</italic></bold></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left"><bold>Elaboration e.g.</bold></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>• exploring some of the meanings and teachings embedded in Dreaming stories</p><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>○ <italic>with icon shown Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures</italic></p></list-item></list></list-item></list></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left">English/Year 2/Language/Language variation and change/ACELA1460</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left">Content descriptor– Understand that spoken, visual and written forms of language are different modes of communication with different features and their use varies according to the audience, purpose, context and cultural background </td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left"><bold>Elaborations e.g.</bold></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>• identifying examples and features of different kinds of spoken, non-verbal, written and visual communication from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and from several Asian cultures within Australia, and associating those features with particular communities</p></list-item><list-item><p>• <italic>Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures; Asia and Australia's Engagement with Asia</italic></p></list-item></list></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left">English/Year 5/Literature/Examining literature/ACELT1610</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left">Content descriptor- Recognise that ideas in literary texts can be conveyed from different viewpoints, which can lead to different kinds of interpretations and responses</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left"><bold>Elaboration e.g.</bold></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left"><list list-type="Bullet"><list-item><p>• examining the narrative voice in texts from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander traditions, which include perspectives of animals and spirits, about how we should care for the Earth, for example reflecting on how this affects significance, interpretation and response</p></list-item><list-item><p>• <italic>Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures; Sustainability</italic></p></list-item></list></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0127842128-8">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0127842128-9">Accreditation and policy documents</hd> <p>Integration of subject areas is not mentioned by the teacher standards or Professional Experience documents found from Australia, England or the US. In the US, the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) (US) programme accreditation document, though, emphasises the need, outlined by Shulman (1987) for teacher education students to 'see how ideas connect across fields and to everyday life' (as cited in CAEP [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref53">19</reflink>], 4). They also state Professional Experiences must give preservice teachers the chance to 'integrate content'.</p> <p>In Australia, at best, integration could be inferred as one of the 'effective teaching strategies' from Australian Standard 3 (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref54">10</reflink>]). Also with regards to Standard 3, <emph>Great Teaching Inspired Learning</emph> [GTIL] (New South Wales Department of Education [NSW DEC] [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref55">40</reflink>]) project suggests that teacher education students on their final Professional Experience should demonstrate their ability to devise 'relevant engaging, significant learning experiences' (GTIL, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref56">40</reflink>], 31). Integration is certainly one way to achieve this, but is not mentioned specifically (though neither is any other strategy). More prevalent in the documents generally is a focus on specific content knowledge, and in the English documents, a focus on phonics and numeracy (Ofsted [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref57">41</reflink>]).</p> <p>The GTIL document for use in assessing preservice teachers on Professional Experiences in schools is based on the AITSL standards, and provides examples of how preservice teachers may demonstrate their progress towards attainment of each standard. Regarding the specific interest of the authors here in GE, it requires that preservice teachers incorporate 'global issues' in their teaching (GTIL [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref58">40</reflink>], 27). This is seen as part of TS1 about knowing 'students and how they learn' and is listed for demonstration in any professional experience, not just the final one. This specific requirement is also a feature of US documents which require teachers to demonstrate TS5 through engaging 'learners in ... problem solving related to authentic local and global issues' (CAEP [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref59">19</reflink>], 4).</p> <p>Cultural competency and catering for diversity feature strongly in accreditation documents, including teaching standards, from Australia (AITSL [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref60">10</reflink>]), England (Department for Education [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref61">23</reflink>]) and the US (InTasc [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref62">30</reflink>]). Almost every AITSL standard addresses cultural competency in some way, referring to students' differing needs (TS1), inclusivity (TS4) and the impact of culture on education (TS1), as well as working sensitively with parents and caregivers (TS7). There is specific reference to students from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander backgrounds (TS1). Cultural competency can be inferred in TS3, which relates to effective communication skills and choosing resources for student engagement. The GTIL document, again mirroring the Teaching Standards, also states that preservice teachers should demonstrate their ability to cater for the needs of students from diverse cultural groups (GTIL [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref63">40</reflink>]). In the US, CAEP's five standards for teacher education programme accreditation incorporate two 'cross-cutting themes', one of which is Diversity (CAEP [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref64">19</reflink>], 20) (the other theme is technology). The English standards also incorporate content related to diversity and cultural competence, with inclusions related to students from all backgrounds (TS1), the ability to differentiate (TS5), and the 'needs of all pupils ... including those with English as an additional language' (TS5) (Department for Education [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref65">23</reflink>], 12). Their professional competencies include 'respect' and 'tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs' (Department for Education [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref66">23</reflink>], 14).</p> <p>Thus we can say that many teacher accreditation documents focus on the need for teachers to address diversity through their teaching and some suggest that global perspectives should be evident. They say much less about integration thus providing little guidance about how to do these things.</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-10">Syllabus study</hd> <p>After examining the accreditation policy documents from England, the US and Australia we decided to examine more closely the syllabus documents the preservice teachers were using on their professional experiences and in their teacher education courses in this case study. The Australian curriculum documents use icons to show where the priorities have been incorporated in learning area content descriptions and elaborations. Only the content descriptors are available on first opening the syllabus site. These often do not show the icon that represents a capability or a priority, and it is only when the elaborations are opened (the non-compulsory parts of the subject area) that the icon and examples can be seen (see detailed table in Appendix showing all discipline areas). See an example of this from the English discipline in Table 2:</p> <p>Table 2. What students saw and taught on Professional Experience in relation to cultures focus.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr valign="top"><td align="left">No of responses (total relating to cultures)</td><td align="center">What they <italic>saw</italic> taught on Professional Experience?</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="center">Intercultural understanding</td><td align="center">Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures</td><td align="center">Asia and Australia's Engagement with Asia</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr valign="top"><td align="left">60</td><td align="left">50</td><td align="left">3</td><td align="left">7</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left">Examples given</td><td align="left"><italic>Refugee week; religion; music from different countries; learning about other cultures; cultural and social perspectives in classroom discussion</italic></td><td align="left"><italic>Indigenous education, Aboriginal perspective</italic></td><td align="left"><italic>Units taught on Bali, China, Japan</italic></td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left"> </td><td align="center">What they taught on Professional Experience?</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left">36</td><td align="left">29</td><td align="left">2</td><td align="left">5</td></tr><tr valign="top"><td align="left">Examples given</td><td align="left"><italic>Multiculturalism, understanding tolerance and inclusion, celebrations around the world, learning in relation to immigration; using the book 'Mirror' by Jeanne Baker.</italic></td><td align="left"><italic>Aboriginal education; Indigenous cultures</italic></td><td align="left"><italic>Lessons involving work on Japan, Bali, PNG</italic></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Even the elaborations are not clear as to how the teaching idea could be implemented, and are not compulsory. Considering the Year 5 literature example for instance, the idea that literature can be viewed and responded to from different perspectives is a good opportunity to include all three cross-curriculum priorities. However, <emph>how</emph> this is integrated is very important. A simple reading of a text about a cultural group different to that of the classroom context does not allow for communication about the diversity of views. It also does not allow students to see what the discipline of science or maths can add to our interpretations. It should be pointed out that the Australian Curriculum does not claim to tell teachers how to teach but does not specify 'how the content must be taught' (ACARA [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref67">4</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-11">Preservice experience data</hd> <p>The Professional Experiences most students were reporting on were relatively brief (4 weeks) and undertaken in their second and third year of studies. These preservice teachers were often not given the opportunity to develop their own units but were usually teaching from already developed units of work as part of school-based programmes given to them by their cooperating teachers. The GE strategies they observed included: anti-bullying and conflict resolution strategies; classroom management and organisation; cultures and celebrations; environments and sustainability; immigration and refugees; international connections; Olympics (Olympic year); and technology use. The cross curriculum capability of Intercultural Understanding was mentioned significantly more than the priorities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures and Asia and Australia's Engagement with Asia and Sustainability. It also seems that preservice teachers saw examples of intercultural understanding demonstrated more often than they themselves taught using this capability. As an example, Table 1 indicates the way culture was treated in teaching, both completed and observed by our preservice teachers. One of the limitations of the survey we gave, however, is that often preservice teachers mentioned with one word how they incorporated global education, but did not elaborate. This made it difficult to know how they actually taught these capabilities or cross curriculum priorities, and whether there was deep or surface level of incorporation. For example, student comments, '<emph>we often talked about multiculturalism'</emph> and <emph>'we looked at PDHPE lessons incorporating cultures and a world perspective'</emph> do not tell us how this was taught and whether it was simply a superficial mention of a game from another culture. Other comments related to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures, such as <emph>'I mainly did Aboriginal education' and 'we looked more at indigenous cultures of Australia'</emph> again do not clarify how these were taught. The intention from the curriculum is to acknowledge:</p> <p>the founding status of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples in Australia, ...[ be ]... alert to the place of negotiation and boundaries in engagements at the cultural interface (Nakata 2007) and [be]mindful of practices that both celebrate and protect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural heritage. (Janke 2008, as cited in ACARA [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref68">3</reflink>])</p> <p>This intention would seem to promote authentic and globally minded integration aimed at learning about real world issues but there is no evidence that this was implemented.</p> <p>Comments from preservice teachers in the survey indicate that both teachers and preservice teachers concentrated on studying countries from South East Asia. Indonesia and Bali in particular were countries mentioned but one student mentioned teaching about <emph>'poverty and those living below the poverty line in PNG [Papua New Guinea]'</emph>) as well as North East Asia (China and Japan were mentioned as countries focussed on). However, the following countries from South Asia including Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka were not mentioned in their teaching and neither were the following countries they saw being taught in their observations: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Most mentions of this priority include only one country, which does not suggest the intended focus on learning about, and recognising 'the diversity within and between the countries of the Asia region.... [societies, cultures, beliefs and environments] and the connections between the peoples of Asia, Australia and the rest of the world' (ACARA [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref69">4</reflink>]).</p> <p>One strategy mentioned by preservice teachers that incorporated global education was the use of picture books. Many of our courses incorporate the use of picture books when teaching preservice teachers how to integrate curriculum and incorporate global education perspectives, using 'big picture' issues. This 'big picture' issues approach incorporates a view of integration that reflects Beane's notion of teaching for the real world, linking global issues to the students' lives and teaching for global citizenship skills and dispositions (Bradbery and Brown [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref70">15</reflink>], 132). The book <emph>Mirror</emph> by Jeannie Baker ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref71">12</reflink>]), comparing Australian and Moroccan cultures, with inherent values of tolerance and respect, was mentioned three times in the comments, perhaps indicating that such texts can assist teachers to integrate more authentically.</p> <p>To provide some explanation regarding these disappointing examples of curriculum integration, the authors found numerous comments on how global perspectives were circumvented in preservice teacher education and in schools. Time constraints, concerns about being controversial, lack of good models to observe, preservice teachers lacking time and funds to do more than the basic required for accreditation and overwhelmed supervising teachers were some of the constraints on global pedagogy mentioned by students (Ferguson-Patrick, Macqueen, and Reynolds [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref72">25</reflink>]). Comments such as <emph>'No time to teach outside the plan; Too much to get through as it was</emph>- <emph>no time for tangents'</emph> illustrate the problem of practising integration and promoting the importance of GE and intercultural understanding for twenty-first Century learning.</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-12">Discussion</hd> <p>Our research questions, which were:</p> <p>How do teacher accreditation, policy and syllabus documents influence the integration of Global Education in the school curriculum?</p> <p>What teaching of integrated curriculum, using Global Education, themes do preservice teachers see in schools?</p> <p>What teaching of integrated curriculum using Global Education themes do preservice teachers conduct in schools?</p> <p>produced interesting results. The preservice teachers themselves identified some reasons for the lack of evident GE in schools, with a particular focus on a 'packed curriculum' and 'no time' and the focus in schools on standardised testing that was imminent- 'We just ran out of time given NAPLAN focus for the first four weeks'. One student also mentioned 'finding support to help do this was difficult', indicating the teachers in their classrooms did not emphasise or prioritise GE in their own teaching. This supports Darling-Hammond ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref73">21</reflink>]) assertion that preservice teachers need to see modelled best practice. Integrated curriculum and integrated teaching strategies linking various parts of the world and local communities and emphasising cooperative and collaborative learning in diverse situations was not evident. Real authentic teaching contexts where students can follow their own interests and where teachers and students are highly motivated to pursue new learning are rare and not very apparent in any of the documents. Teaching global education, although highly valuable and definitely of great value in the twenty-first century, is not easy to implement in such an educational context.</p> <p>Imperatives to take a global perspective at least in terms of cultural competency are replete in policy documents from Australia, England and the US and in teacher professional accreditation statements. However, as shown in the results the priorities are not easily visible in the new Australian curriculum, often hidden as suggestions in how to develop the elaborations. This provides some explanation as to why both teachers and preservice teachers were not incorporating these into their teaching explicitly in our survey. The logistics of the electronic version of a curriculum document is part of the issue in the Australian context. The content description will not show the icon that represents a cross curriculum capability or a cross curriculum priority and only on opening the elaborations (the non-compulsory parts of the subject area) can the icon and examples be seen. We argue therefore that it is easy to miss a suggested opportunity to integrate and therefore much more likely that links to the priorities may not be made by teachers. As noted, the Australian Curriculum does not claim to tell teachers how to teach but only what to teach, with the various states of Australia having the responsibility for pedagogy under the Federal system of education. This in itself is another constraining factor for Australian teachers.</p> <p>Taking a global perspective is not strongly evident in schools where our students are undertaking professional experience. In Australia the influences on teachers' work reported by Clandinin ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref74">18</reflink>]) of 'globalisation, refugee populations, immigration, demographics, economic disparities and environmental changes' have been noted (as cited in Le Cornu [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref75">33</reflink>], 4). It is less clear that as a profession we have responded. The importance of translating curriculum document to classroom practice has once again seemingly been too hard.</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-13">Conclusion</hd> <p>We set out to explore current challenges to teaching in an integrated manner, in a context where teachers perceive a conflict between requirements for teaching for 'good' results in high stakes testing regimes and the rhetoric around teaching twenty-first century skills in Australia. We were curious as to the extent of integrated curriculum being experienced in schools in this global and diverse world. Integrated teaching can be dismissed as irrelevant when, in Australia at least, all curriculum documents are positioned as discipline focused and all high stakes testing is situated around discipline knowledge. Documents related to teacher education and teaching in England and the US were similarly limited. It would be interesting to examine policy and accreditation documents from other parts of the world, as well as the experience of preservice teachers, with integrated curriculum and twenty-first century pedagogies in more contexts.</p> <p>Despite the discipline focus of testing and curriculum documents, these same curriculum documents, professional teaching standards and conceptual frameworks for educators (such as the Melbourne Declaration [MCEETYA (Ministerial Council on Education Employment Training & Youth Affairs) [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref76">37</reflink>]]) continue to incorporate a number of cross curriculum, and therefore integrated, priorities and capabilities. As teacher educators, we likewise struggle to respond to accreditation and accountability in the teaching profession as,</p> <p>we attempt to strike a delicate balance between focusing on big picture ideas in our methods courses and the world that recognizes the importance of coursework on justice, equity, diversity, and sociocultural contexts of teaching and learning. (Richmond, Bartell, and Hadley Dunn [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref77">48</reflink>], 103)</p> <p>Thus in terms of our understanding of definitions of integration, expectations of integration and outcomes of integration using GE as a case study, the outlook is not good. The picture we see from preservice teaching, the teaching preservice teachers observed, and the images provided by documents that inform teaching, is that integration is seen as a method of making students aware of a global theme in different disciplines but is not seen as a multidisciplinary or transdisciplinary approach. There was a lot of rhetoric in professional documents about collaboration, ICT competence and building communities as a focus for integration across skills and areas of current issues as envisaged by thinkers such as Dewey ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref78">24</reflink>]) and Beane ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref79">13</reflink>]) but it was again not clearly evident in curriculum documents. When the best successful outcome from integration, as detected by Gresnigt et al. ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref80">27</reflink>]), is in teacher and learner motivation, the motivation that arises from knowing that their learning is relevant and authentic to their world, the loss when integration does not occur is immense. Teacher education curriculum must therefore incorporate this imperative.</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-14">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.</p> <hd id="AN0127842128-15">Notes on contributors</hd> <p>Notes on Contributors</p> <p>Kate Ferguson-Patrick is a senior lecturer in the School of Education and is professional development team leader of the Global Education Research and Teaching Team at the University of Newcastle, Australia. Her research interests are in cooperative learning, democracy classrooms, Intercultural Understanding and global education, teacher professional learning, 21st century skills, and action learning/research.</p> <p>Ruth Reynolds is an Associate Professor and Team leader of the Global Education Research and Teaching Team at the University of Newcastle, Australia. Her research interests are in encouraging curriculum and classroom pedagogy focused on developing 21st century skills such as intercultural competence.</p> <p>Suzanne Macqueen is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Education, University of Newcastle, Australia. She teaches courses in social studies curriculum, literacy, quality teaching and professional preparation including classroom management. Suzanne is a member of the Global Education Research and Teaching (GERT) team which focuses on the development of global citizenship. Her research interests also lie in widening participation and equity in education.</p> <ref id="AN0127842128-16"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref37" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> ACARA (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority). 2011. The Australian Curriculum Information Sheet: A world class curriculum for the 21st Century (October 2011). Sydney: Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref10" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> ACARA (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority). 2013. The Shape of the Australian Curriculum, May. Sydney: ACARA.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref68" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> ACARA (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority). 2014. General Capabilities. Sydney: ACARA.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref67" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> ACARA (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority). 2015. Cross Curriculum Priories: Asia and Australia's Enagement with Asia overview. Sydney: ACARA.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref7" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Ananiadou, K., and M. Claro. 2009. "21st Century Skills and Competences for New Millennium Learners in OECD Countries." OECD Education Working Papers (41). doi: https://doi.org/10.1787/218525261154 10.1787/19939019</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref32" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Angus, L. 2012. "Teaching within and Against the Circle of Privilege: Reforming Teachers, Reforming Schools." Journal of Education Policy 27 (2): 231–251.10.1080/02680939.2011.598240</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref3" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> AITSL (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership). 2011. National Professional Standards for Teachers. Edited by AITSL. Melbourne: AITSL limited.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref42" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> AITSL (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership). 2013. "Initial Teacher Education: Data Report."</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref4" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> AITSL (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership). 2017. Australian Teaching Performance Assessment. Edited by AITSL. Melbourne: AITSL.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> AITSL (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership). n.d. Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Accessed January 22, 2016. <ulink href="http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-teachers/standards/list">http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-teachers/standards/list</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Au, W. W. 2008. "Devising inequality: A Bernsteinian analysis of high‐stakes testing and social reproduction in education." British Journal of Sociology of Education,29: 639–651.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Baker, J. 2010. Mirror. London: Walker.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Beane, J. 1997. Curriculum Integration: Designing the Core of Democratic Education. New York: Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Boix-Mansilla, V., and A. Jackson. 2011. Educating for Global Competence. New York: NY Asia Society.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bradbery, D., and J. Brown. 2015. "Teaching with a Values Stance for Global Citizenship." In Contesting and Constructing International perspectives in Global Education, edited by R. Reynolds, D. Bradbery, J. Brown, K. Carroll, D. Donnelly, K. Ferguson-Patrick and S. Macqueen, 125–132. Rotterdam: Sense.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brand, B., and C. Triplett. 2012. "Interdisciplinary Curriculum: An Abandoned Concept?" Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice 18 (3): 381–393.10.1080/13540602.2012.629847</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brown, C., and Weber, N. 2016. "Struggling to Overcome the State's Prescription for Practice: A Study of a Sample of Early Educators' Professional Development and Action Research Projects in a High-Stakes Teaching Context." Journal of Teacher Education 67: 183–202.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clandinin, J. 2009. "Attending to Changing Landscapes: Shaping the Interwoven Identities of Teachers and Teacher Educators." Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 37 (2): 141–154.10.1080/13598660902806316</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> CAEP (Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation). 2013. "CAEP Accreditation Standards." Accessed January 22, 2016. <ulink href="http://www.caepnet.org/standards/introduction">http://www.caepnet.org/standards/introduction</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Curriculum Corporation. 2008. Global Perspectives: A Framework for Global Education in Australian Schools. Carlton South Victoria: Curriculum Corporation.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Darling-Hammond, L. 2006. "Constructing 21st-Century Teacher Education." Journal of Teacher Education 7 (3): 300–314.10.1177/0022487105285962</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Darling-Hammond, L. 2017. "Teacher Education around the World: What can we Learn from International Practice?" European Journal of Teacher Education 40 (3): 291–309. doi:10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Department for Education. 2013. Teachers' Standards: Guidance for School Leaders, School Staff and Governing Bodies. London: DFE. Accessed April 27, 2016. https://<ulink href="http://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment%5fdata/file/301107/Teachers%5f%5fStandards.pdf">www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment%5fdata/file/301107/Teachers%5f%5fStandards.pdf</ulink>. ed.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dewey, J. 1956. The Child and the Curriculum: And the School and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferguson-Patrick, K., S. Macqueen, and R. Reynolds. 2014. "Pre-service Teacher Perspectives on the Importance of Global Education: World and Classroom Views." Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice 20 (4): 470–482.10.1080/13540602.2014.881639</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferguson-Patrick, K., R. Reynolds, and S. Macqueen. 2012. "Global Education in Teacher Education Programs: Views from Pre-service Teachers." Joint AARE APERA International Conference, Univeristy of Sydney</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gresnigt, R., R. Taconis, H. van Keulen, K. Gravemeijer, and L. Baartman. 2014. "Promoting Science and Technology in Primary Education: A Review of Integrated Curricula." Studies in Science Education 50 (1): 47–84.10.1080/03057267.2013.877694</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hicks, David, and Cathie Holden. 1995. Visions of the Future: Why We need to Teach for Tomorrow. Stoke‐on‐Trent: Trentham Books.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hutchinson, Francis P. 1996. "Educating for the 21st Century: Beyond Racist, Sexist, and Ecologically Violent Futures." Peabody Journal of Education 71 (3): 42–62.10.1207/s15327930pje7103_3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium(InTasc). 2011. InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards: A resource for state dialogue Council of Chief State School Officers. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State SchoolOfficers.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kereluik, K., P. Mishra, C. Fahnoe, and L. Terry. 2013. "What Knowledge is of Most Worth: Teacher Knowledge for 21st Century Learning." Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education 29 (4): 127–140.10.1080/21532974.2013.10784716</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kopish, M. 2017. "Global Citizenship Education and the Development of Globally Competent Teacher Candidates." Journal of International Social Studies 7 (2): 20–59.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Le Cornu, R. 2015. Key Components of Effective Professional Experience in Initial Teacher Education in Australia. Melbourne: Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ling, L. 2017. "Australian Teacher Education: Inside-out, Outside-in, Backwards and Forwards?" European Journal of Teacher Education 40 (5): 561–571.10.1080/02619768.2017.1385599</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lingard, B. 2010. "Policy Borrowing, Policy Learning: Testing Times in Australian Schooling." Critical Studies in Education 51 (2): 129–147.10.1080/17508481003731026</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Macqueen, S., and K. Ferguson-Patrick. 2015. "Where's the Action in Global Education? Employing Global Education for Lasting Change through Teacher Education." In Contesting and Constructing International perspectives in Global Education, edited by R. Reynolds, D. Bradbery, J. Brown, K. Carroll, D. Donnelly, K. Ferguson-Patrick and S. Macqueen, 115–124. Rotterdam: Sense.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> MCEETYA (Ministerial Council on Education Employment Training & Youth Affairs). 2008. Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians. Melbourne: Curriculum Corporation.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McNeil, L. 2002. Contradictions of School Reform: Educational Costs of Standardized Testing. London: Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Curriculum Board. 2009. The Shape of the Australian Curriculum. Edited by National Curriculum Board, 1–16. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> NSW DEC (New South Wales Department of Education). n.d.. Great Teaching Inspired Learning [GTIL]. <ulink href="http://www.dec.nsw.gov.au/our-services/schools/great-teaching-inspired-learningNSWGovernment">http://www.dec.nsw.gov.au/our-services/schools/great-teaching-inspired-learningNSWGovernment</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ofsted. 2015. Initial Teacher Education Inspection Handbook. Manchester, NH: Ofsted.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Polesel, J., S. Rice, and N. Dulfer. 2014. "The Impact of High-stakes Testing on Curriculum and Pedagogy: A Teacher Perspective from Australia." Journal of Education Policy 29 (5): 640–657.10.1080/02680939.2013.865082</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reay, D., and D. Wiliam. 1999. "'I'll be a Nothing': Structure, Agency and the Construction of Identity Through Assessment." British Educational Research Journal 25 (3): 343–354.10.1080/0141192990250305</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rennie, L., G. Venville, and J. Wallace. 2013. Knowledge that Counts in a Global Community: Exploring the Contribution of Integrated Curriculum: Abingdon: Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reynolds, R., D. Bradbery, J. Brown, D. Donnelly, K. Ferguson-Patrick, and S. Macqueen. 2013. "Teaching Global Education: Lessons Learned for Classroom Teachers." Ethos 21: 18–22.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reynolds, R., D. Bradbery, J. Brown, D. Donnelly, K. Ferguson-Patrick, S. Macqueen, and A. Ross. 2015. "A Values-based Pedagogical Stance. Teaching Teachers for Global Education in Australia." In The State of Global Education: Learning with the World and its People, edited by Brad Maguth and Jeremy Hilburn, 174–187. New York: Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reynolds, R. 2014. "Professional experience in Australian teacher education programs: an overview." In Practical Knowledge in Teacher Education: Approaches to teacher internship programmes, edited by Mora, J. C. D. & Wood, K. London: Routledge & Taylor and Francis</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Richmond, G., T. Bartell, and A. Hadley Dunn. 2016. "Beyond "Tinkering": Enacting the Imperative for Change in Teacher Education in a Climate of Standards and Accountability." Journal of Teacher Education 67 (2): 102–104.10.1177/0022487116628837</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Subedi, B. 2010. "Reading the World Through Critical Global Perspectives." In Critical global perspectives, edited by B. Subedi, 1–18. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shulman, L. 1987. " Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform." Harvard Educational Review. 57 (1): 1–23.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thompson, G., and A. G. Harbaugh. 2013. "A Preliminary Analysis of Teacher Perceptions of the Effects of NAPLAN on Pedagogy and Curriculum." The Australian Educational Researcher 40 (3): 299–314.10.1007/s13384-013-0093-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Varadharajan, M., and J. Buchanan. 2017. "Any Small Change?: Teacher Education, Compassion, Understandings and Perspectives on Global Development Education." International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning 9 (1): 33–48. doi:10.18546/IJDEGL9.1.04.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Webb, E., D. Campbell, R. Schwartx, and L. Sechrest. 1966. Unobtrusive Measures: Nonreactive Measures in the Social Sciences. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zong, G., A. Wilson, and A. Quashiga. 2008. "Global Education." In Handbook of Research on Social Studies, edited by L. Levstick and C. Tyson, 197–216. New York: Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Kate Ferguson-Patrick; Ruth Reynolds and Suzanne Macqueen</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref77"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1170442
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Integrating Curriculum: A Case Study of Teaching Global Education
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ferguson-Patrick%2C+Kate%22">Ferguson-Patrick, Kate</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Reynolds%2C+Ruth%22">Reynolds, Ruth</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Macqueen%2C+Suzanne%22">Macqueen, Suzanne</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22European+Journal+of+Teacher+Education%22"><i>European Journal of Teacher Education</i></searchLink>. 2018 41(2):187-201.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 15
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2018
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Global+Education%22">Global Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Integrated+Curriculum%22">Integrated Curriculum</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Case+Studies%22">Case Studies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Implementation%22">Curriculum Implementation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Preservice+Teachers%22">Preservice Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Experience%22">Teaching Experience</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22National+Standards%22">National Standards</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Guidelines%22">Guidelines</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Evaluation%22">Curriculum Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Accreditation+%28Institutions%29%22">Accreditation (Institutions)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Surveys%22">Student Surveys</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Policy%22">Educational Policy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Policy+Analysis%22">Policy Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Australia%22">Australia</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/02619768.2018.1426565
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0261-9768
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Despite widespread support for integrated approaches to teaching, classroom practice reveals a lack of implementation. This paper explores challenges and opportunities in teaching an integrated curriculum, and connects this with the contemporary notion of a twenty-first century curriculum and pedagogy. A case study of Global Education (GE) is used to delineate the complexity of issues when teachers attempt to move beyond disciplinary-based teaching approaches. We examine curriculum documents, advice for teachers on curriculum implementation, preservice teachers' experiences in schools during Professional Experiences and national guidelines for Professional Experience. Through these data, a broad picture emerges of influences on integrating curricula in classrooms. Opportunities to integrate curriculum incorporating twenty-first century pedagogies were limited by pressures on teachers with preservice teachers rarely exposed to authentic integration. Teachers' professional standing requires clear guidelines, which allow them to pursue important twenty-first century content and skills, for young citizens and this must begin in preservice education.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 50
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2018
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1170442
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1170442
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/02619768.2018.1426565
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 15
        StartPage: 187
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Global Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Integrated Curriculum
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Case Studies
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Curriculum Implementation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Preservice Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Experience
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: National Standards
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Guidelines
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Curriculum Evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Accreditation (Institutions)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Surveys
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Policy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Policy Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Australia
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Integrating Curriculum: A Case Study of Teaching Global Education
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ferguson-Patrick, Kate
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Reynolds, Ruth
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Macqueen, Suzanne
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2018
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0261-9768
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 41
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: European Journal of Teacher Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1