See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/324250557

Integrated Curriculum as an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century

Capabilities

Article · January 2018

DOI: 10.30777/APJER.2018.1.1.03

CITATIONS READS

54 52,329

2 authors:

Susan Margaret Drake Joanne Reid

Brock University Brock University
34 PUBLICATIONS   391 CITATIONS    6 PUBLICATIONS   74 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Interdisciplinary curriculum View project

Educational reform/change View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Susan Margaret Drake on 16 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Article

Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Research

Integrated Curriculum as 2018. Vol. 1(1) 31-50
ⓒ The Author(s) 2018
an Effective Way to Teach
21st Century Capabilities

6)

Susan M. Drake*
Brock University, Ontario, Canada

Joanne L. Reid
Brock University, Ontario, Canada

Abstract
There is an emerging international consensus on the importance of developing 21st Century
capabilities as part of education curricula. Yet, educators are uncertain about the definitions
of the capabilities, and how to teach and assess them. This paper offers integrated
curriculum as an effective way to resolve some of the challenges associated with
developing the C21 capabilities. We present an overarching curriculum framework - the
Know-Do-Be. Next, we identify the capabilities as they are described in various jurisdictions.
Then we offer a backward design planning process that allows for creative and coherent
curriculum design. Models of integrated curriculum are explored followed by research on
the effectiveness of integration. Finally, we show how bringing together the competencies
and integrated curriculum can create a rich learning situation. The paper concludes with
recommendations for facilitating the foregrounding of the 21st Century capabilities through
curriculum integration.

Keywords
21st Century capabilities, 21st Century competencies, integrated curriculum, curriculum
design

* Corresponding author
Faculty of Education, Brock University, St. Catharines ON, Canada
Email: sdrake@brocku.ca
32 Integrated Curriculum as an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century Capabilities

In our global networked world, there is a continuous explosion of knowledge. Students

can no longer simply memorize a collection of facts to pass a test. They need to be
lifelong learners who can manage and make sense of huge amounts of data, and be
able to problem-solve the complex issues of the day. They need to be able to
differentiate between relevant and reliable information and alternative facts designed to
confuse. They need to be creative thinkers who can innovate in a world that offers
open access to knowledge. In short, what is considered worth knowing, doing and being
is shifting, given the global context. We all need the skills to navigate life in an
increasingly complex and ever-changing environment.
Education in the 21st Century has been and is being profoundly influenced by
technology and globalization. Capabilities such as communication, creativity, and critical
thinking that have always had a place in education take on new meaning and relevance
with technological advancements (Voogt, Erstad, Dede, & Mishra, 2013; Rotherham &
Willingham, 2009; Silva, 2009). There is an emerging global consensus on the
importance of developing 21st Century capabilities as part of education curricula
(Ontario Ministry of Education, 2016).
Yet, concerns affecting both teachers in the field and teacher educators revolve
around how to teach and assess these capabilities (Chu et al., 2017; van de
Oudeweetering & Voogt, 2017; Thijs, Fisser, & Van der Hoeven, 2014). Educators
know much more about how to teach subjects such as mathematics than they know
how to teach the capabilities (Häkkinena, Järveläb, Mäkitalo-Sieglc, Ahonena, Näykkib,
& Valtonend, 2016). There is little professional development around the capabilities or
knowledge of innovative teaching practices (Voogt & Roblin, 2012).
The purpose of this paper is to offer integrated curriculum as an effective way to
resolve some of the challenges associated with developing the 21st Century capabilities.
We believe that students fortunate enough to experience curriculum integration may find
themselves better prepared for life in the 21st Century.
We offer a Know, Do, Be (KDB) framework (Drake & Reid, 2010). While the KDB
framework can apply to any subject-based curriculum, it is especially useful for
constructing an integrated curriculum based on curriculum mandates. This framework is
also an effective way to address the interdisciplinary competencies.
In this paper, we use the terms “capabilities” and “competencies” interchangeably.
First, we present the KDB framework. Next, we identify the capabilities as they are
described in various jurisdictions. Then we offer a backward design planning process
that allows for creative and coherent curriculum design. Models of integrated curriculum
Susan M. Drake⋅Joanne L. Reid 33

are explored followed by research on the effectiveness of integration. Finally, we look

at the context of teaching in the 21st Century to bring the competencies and integrated
curriculum together to create a rich learning situation.

The KDB Framework

There is an international shift in considering what is most important for a student to

Know, Do, and Be (KDB). Traditionally, curriculum expectations were largely in the
cognitive realm - the Know of the curriculum. In the 21st Century, the Know focuses
more on conceptual thinking rather than memorizing facts. Examples of fundamental
concepts include sustainability, change, cause and consequences, interdependence, and
systems. These concepts are interdisciplinary.
The Do has shifted from lower-order skills such as recall and description to complex
interdisciplinary capabilities such as communication, collaboration, critical thinking,
information management, and creativity. Literacy and numeracy remain the basic
foundation, but research and inquiry are also prioritized.
Finally, Be is also important as jurisdictions develop new educational policies that
focus on mental health, personal growth, socio-emotional learning, and values and
attitudes. Character education is a hallmark of the Be. Character education cuts across
the curriculum in all subjects and grade levels, and has three main goals: lifelong
learning, creating and maintaining healthy relationships, and developing the values to
successfully participate in society (Bialik, Bogan, Fadel, & Horvathova, 2015). The Be
is also embedded in citizenship as is found in several jurisdictions’ curriculum policies.
The Know, Do, and Be are interconnected and interdependent. Twenty-first century
capabilities are not taught in isolation but rather are taught within a core body of
knowledge (Silva, 2009). Consider the capability of Citizenship. As students learn the
concept of good citizenship (Know), then act in ways that demonstrate citizenship (Do),
they become good citizens (Be).

Capabilities / Competencies

The point of becoming proficient in the capabilities or competences is to become a

fulfilled and successful member of 21st Century society. Countries such as Canada,
34 Integrated Curriculum as an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century Capabilities

England, Finland, Japan, Northern Ireland, Singapore, Australia and Scotland are actively
exploring how to identify, define, teach and assess such skills. So too are well-known
organizations such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD), Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills (ATC21S), and Partnership
for 21st Century Skills (P21). Analysis of frameworks for 21st Century competencies
showed a high degree of agreement in the identification of the capabilities and in
describing what they are (see for example, Chu, Reynolds, Tavares, Notari, & Lee,
2017; Ontario Ministry of Education, 2016; Voogt & Roblin, 2012). Ontario, Canada
describes competencies as the six Cs: communication, character, critical thinking,
creativity, citizenship, collaboration. All six Cs appear in the overarching curriculum
frameworks of Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore, Finland, and USA (P21).
What do competencies mean to teachers? A web-based survey done by van de
Oudeweetering and Voogt (2017) explored the perceptions of 2804 elementary or
secondary teachers in the Netherlands. The survey offered ten scales based on the
dimensions of 21st Century competencies. For each scale, three to five items were
developed that represented classroom activities aimed at fostering student learning of
those competencies. The Netherlands study showed that the competencies did not
necessarily represent new knowledge for the teachers who believed they were already
teaching them. However, they agreed that technology moderated how the capabilities are
taught in class.
What is the relationship of the competencies with each other? Research on new
technologies in education, for example, indicates a reciprocal relationship between
information and communication technology (ICT) and creativity (Henriksen, Mishra &
Fisser, 2016). We are very interested in hearing about the experiences of teachers who
explicitly teach competencies using the Measuring What Matters model (Boehme, Crawford,
Murray, Stolys, & Strangway, 2017). In this model, there is a broad domain such as
creativity, socio-emotional learning, citizenship or health (http://peopleforeducation.ca/mwm-
defining-the-competencies). The competencies lie within a domain and represent very
specific criteria that are observable, concrete, teachable, and learnable (Kidder, 2017,
Personal communication). For example, competencies for creativity are articulated like
this: “students work with objects and ideas without an end goal in mind” or “students
generate a range of novel ideas in relation to personal knowledge and learning context”.
This specificity helped the teachers identify the interconnected nature of learning areas
often associated with broad domains like creativity or social emotional learning. That is,
the teachers found that when they directly taught one competency, the other
Susan M. Drake⋅Joanne L. Reid 35

competencies also improved. For example, instruction aimed at developing certain

targeted areas of student creativity also improved other targeted areas in socio-emotional
learning because the competencies were interconnected within the specific type of
learning conditions that students experienced. We intuitively thought this interconnection
might be true, and the teachers’ experiences help confirm our intuitions. While
researchers studying competency-learning in classrooms within this project are certain
that there are strong interconnections and relationships among these areas of learning,
they are uncertain as to the degree of interconnectedness, or the specific relationships
between areas like creativity and social emotional learning. They do, however, suspect
that the connectivity is directly related to the kind of learning context that the students
experience (Cameron, Watkins, and Kidder, 2016).

What is Curriculum Integration?

Critical thinking, creative thinking, citizenship, character development, and communication

transcend the disciplines. Thus, it makes sense that curriculum integration offers an
effective way to teach these 21st Century capabilities and maintain, and possibly boost
academic achievement. Indeed, Sill (2001) identifies creativity, critical, and higher order
thinking as key benefits of interdisciplinary activities. But what is curriculum integration?
Integrated curriculum has a wide range of definitions (Jacobs, 1989). We offer a
simplistic continuum for understanding different ways of constructing an integrated
curriculum (Figure 1). Fusion is often a way to begin to integrate the curriculum. In
Ontario, for example, educators are required to infuse character education, financial
literacy, critical literacy and environmental awareness into mandated subject-based
curriculum K to 12. A multidisciplinary curriculum features a similar theme or a
common capability in different subject areas, but each subject is still distinct and
separate. For example, the theme of “identity” could be explored in geography
(mapping), history (nationality), literature (characterization), science (classification) and so
on. An interdisciplinary curriculum occurs when skills such as inquiry or
communication are taught across subject areas and the subjects are less distinct. For
example, students could apply critical thinking to develop a social justice campaign
around a local issue such as water quality or homelessness. A transdisciplinary
curriculum transcends the disciplines; the organizing center revolves around a pressing
question, issue or problem. Subjects lose their boundaries when they are holistically
36 Integrated Curriculum as an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century Capabilities

blended around the question. There can be a focused attention on developing relevant
capabilities. For example, students could explore controversial aspects of citizenship as
represented by art in public spaces. Their exploration could challenge taken-for-granted
assumptions: How does public art reflect civic values, and are those values relevant
today? Which socio-economic, ethnic and political groups are represented and who is
missing? Is graffiti vandalism or public art? Do war memorials promote positive forms
of citizenship? Students could critique existing installations, research the artists,
interview activists and civic leaders, and create and install their own public art work.
The terms “integrated” or “interdisciplinary” are often used interchangeably to describe a
variety of approaches such as these described and will be used that way in this paper.

Fusion Multidisciplinary

Interdisciplinary Transdisciplinary
Figure 1. Continuum of integration
Susan M. Drake⋅Joanne L. Reid 37

How Effective is Integrated Curriculum?

Integrated curriculum is effective for academic learning. Evidence collected from many
studies at all grade levels for over almost 100 years repeatedly leads to the same
conclusion. Students experiencing integrated approaches do as well as, or better than,
students in traditional classrooms in academic success (see, for example, Aikin, 1941;
Barr, Boulay, Selman, McCormick, Lowenstein, Gamse, Fine, & Leonard, 2015; Drake,
Savage, Reid, Bernard, & Beres, 2015; Yoon, Dyehouse, Lucietto, Diefes-Dux, &
Capobianco, 2014). Students who experience the integration of socio-emotional learning
improve their academic scores (Vega, 2012b). Integrated curriculum can lead to deeper
learning. “Deep learning” means the shift from surface learning and covering content to
understanding a topic in depth with the student taking the lead in his or her learning”
(Fullan, 2013, p. 3). In addition, interdisciplinary approaches can lead to increased
student engagement and motivation, less absenteeism, and better attitudes toward school.
Student endorsements highlight positive experiences in the affective domain – growing
more self-confident and self-aware, forming positive relationships, and recognizing their
place in their communities (MacMath, Roberts, Wallace, & Chi, 2009; McNaughton,
2014; Russell & Burton, 2000; Smithrin & Upitis, 2005; Venville, Sheffield, Rennie, &
Wallace, 2008). The benefits of integration can be seen internationally; the countries
that top the PISA scales all have policy provisions for integration (Drake & Savage,
2016). Finland, for example, one of the top-ranked countries in the world on OECD
measures, has shifted to a project-based learning approach that is interdisciplinary in
nature (Halinen, 2016). Quebec, Canada is also high ranking in PISA testing and
features an integrated curriculum evidenced through culminating rich performance tasks.
Korea offers an integrated curriculum at many junctures in its recent revised policy
(Minister of Education, Science and Technology Korea, 2009). In high school, the
common core subjects are integrated. Integrated Social Study includes History,
Economics, and Geography. Integrated Science Study includes Physics, Chemistry, Earth
Science, and Biology. The exploration of the STEAM program is an effective way to
implement Science, Technology, Mathematics, Engineering, and the Arts. The “free
semester system” in middle school schedules blocks of afternoon time for one semester
so that students can participate in open-ended pursuits such as club activities and career
education.
38 Integrated Curriculum as an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century Capabilities

Designing an Integrated Curriculum

Backward design. Backward design is a curriculum design process that allows for
creative teaching while ensuring that teachers address their curriculum mandates
(Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Step 1 is to ask what is most important for students to
Know, Do and Be. Step 2 is to determine the summative assessment which will
determine whether a student has accomplished the KDB. This type of assessment,
especially in integrated approaches, is a rich performance assessment task rather than a
test or exam. Step 3 is to create the daily instructional activities and formative
assessments that scaffold the summative performance task. The instructional activities
enable the student to acquire the knowledge and skills, and develop the traits required
by the summative task.
An important aspect of designing a curriculum is to give students as much voice and
choice as possible. Alison Boehme (2017) created a “Student-led curriculum inquiry”
model in which Grades 4 and 5 students investigate the Ontario curriculum. To begin,
students collaboratively chart what they find when exploring curriculum documents,
Growing Success (assessment guide) and the 21st Century competency documents. Once
students have explored the science, social studies, health, math and language documents,
they determine a topic of their choice and pull standards together to develop an
integrated project. Students also focus on developing competencies using the Measuring
What Matters model. Many of the projects tend to be STEM-related and have included
projects on fractals, the periodic table, aviation, computer engineering, steam-punk,
pollution, fracking, better car designs−the list goes on. Alison finds she has to research
most of the topics just to keep up with the students. Alison won a Ministry of Ontario
research grant to teach math and develop creativity by using low-floor high-ceiling tasks
in problem solving that required students to think flexibly and fluidly in terms of the
application of their knowledge and understanding.

Unifying Frameworks. When we ask what is most important for students to know,
do, and be as a first step in backward design, it is most effective to look at the big
picture. Many nations offer a unifying framework or a set of goals that cut across all
subjects and grades (Drake & Savage, 2016). It is in the unifying frameworks that the
capabilities are presented in curriculum policy documents. We interpret this as meaning
that subject-based disciplinary content knowledge is subordinate to these overarching
Susan M. Drake⋅Joanne L. Reid 39

interdisciplinary capabilities.
Examples of unifying frameworks are the following:
● Singapore’s The Framework for 21st Century Competencies and Student Outcomes
(https://www.moe.gov.sg/education/education-system/21st-century-competencies)
● USA’s Partnership for 21st Century Skills
http://www.p21.org/our-work/p21-framework) and
● Hong Kong’s education framework
https://cd.edb.gov.hk/becg/english/chapter1.html).

We like to use an umbrella as a graphic to show that certain knowledge (Know),

skills (Do), and attitudes/values/behaviours (Be) act as an umbrella over the entire
curriculum (Drake, 2012) (https://www.musicjinni.com/q5OwmfLJJ8e/KDB-Umbrella.html).
These images convey the breadth and cohesion of 21st Century capabiities and values
across subjects and grades.
Such unifying frameworks make curriculum integration easier. Educators can see the
big picture – the KDB. Curriculum designers can align their curriculum with the
framework and use it as a bridge across disciplines. This is particularly important for
the capabilities that are intended to be taught in each subject and grade.
We illustrate the KDB Umbrella by interpreting Korea’s educational goals in Figure 2.

BE
Autonomous, creative,
humanitarian, democratic
citizens
DO
KNOW Creative processes
Subject-area Life skills (21st
expertise Century capabilities)

Figure 2. A possible representation of the Know/Do/Be Umbrella for Korea’s Curriculum

40 Integrated Curriculum as an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century Capabilities

Rich performance assessment task. The second step in backwards design is to

consider how we will know whether students have learned the KDB. This step requires
a performance task as a summative assessment. This task is best when it is rich and
complex, inquiry-based, and set in the real world. It should offer student choice and
invite an authentic public audience (Drake, Reid, & Kolohon, 2014). The type of task
is usually interdisciplinary by its very nature. Assessment tools for the task such as a
marking rubric need to be created and shared with students at this time. Students need
to know from the beginning of a unit what they will be assessed on and how this
assessment will be done.

Daily activities. The third step is to create the daily activities and embedded
assessments that students will complete to enable them to demonstrate the rich
performance assessment task. During this step, the designer needs to constantly align the
activities and assessments with the KDB that was established in step 1. These activities
act as a scaffold for the rich performance assessment task that was created in step 2. A
guide to what types of instructional activities and assessments follow in the next
section.

Teaching in the 21St Century

The emerging consensus is that teaching competencies requires profound changes in

pedagogy and assessment (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2016). In this section, we
explore some of the major trends in the 21st Century teaching. These trends can inform
the teaching and learning that most fully engages students while also addressing the
capabilities.

Inquiry. Inquiry has become an important focus in the 21st Century and can address
the capabilities. Inquiry and curriculum integration go together well. Traditionally, an
inquiry involves a teacher-directed process such as in a science lab. By contrast,
teachers who are drawn to integrated curriculum are usually favourable to a constructivist
philosophy and a student-centered, experiential approach (Kuhlthau, Maniotes, & Caspari,
2015). This shift facilitates creativity and curiosity, because students are encouraged to
pursue their own interests. Additionally, it can foster critical thinking when an inquiry
is set in the complicated real world. It can involve collaboration because often the work
Susan M. Drake⋅Joanne L. Reid 41

involves research, experimentation and problem-solving with others.

Inquiries can be across subjects, and indeed, rich, challenging questions do encompass
more than one subject area. This will be especially true when the inquiry arises from a
student’s questions. Teachers begin with “wonderings” in the earliest years. Teachers
listen carefully to children as they play, and teachers help identify what sparks awe. A
Kindergarten class explored the students’ wondering: “Do bubbles freeze in the winter?”
A favourite strategy is to create a “wonder wall” where students’ questions are on
prominent display and are referred to during class activities.
Over the grade levels, the concept of wonderings deepens. Questions become more
complex: What is the source of crime and what can we do to eliminate it? and What
is the role of politics in a controversial issue such as climate change? Students learn
the inquiry procedure as represented in subjects such as science or history or art. They
then can apply these procedures to their own inquiries whether they be disciplinary or
interdisciplinary. This follows the recommendations of John Dewey (1938) who believed
that students learned best from their own organic experiences, but that these experiences
must be accompanied by the structured scientific method to be educative.
One of the most effective and natural ways to implement this inquiry is through
project-based learning. This type of learning begins with a driving question and results
in an in-depth teaching/learning unit where students complete an inquiry to address the
question. Because most meaningful inquiries focus on real world situations, they are
usually interdisciplinary. If teaching a standards-based curriculum, the questions emerge
from the concepts that are found in the Know of the KDB.
In project-based learning, the students can encounter “wicked problems” where there
are no clear-cut answers and there are innumerable causes that demand acknowledgement
and inquiry in many different subject areas (Camillus, 2008). Poverty and terrorism are
examples of such problems. Critical thinking is key in this type of inquiry. Some
excellent examples can be found at Buck Institute for Education (http://www.bie.org/),
New Tech Network (https://newtechnetwork.org/), and Expeditionary Learning
(http://eleducation.org/). Five principles for high quality project-based work are described
in a video from Edutopia (https://www.edutopia.org/video/5-keys-rigorous-project-based-
learning).
At the Inquiry Hub, a high school in Coquitlam, British Columbia, Canada, students
conduct their own inquiries based on their own interests (Drake, Reid, & Kolohon,
2014). This process encourages inquiry, research, and creativity. Consider these examples
of inquiries that students have completed, either by themselves or collaboratively:
42 Integrated Curriculum as an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century Capabilities

● Designing 3-D models to scale

● Developing a commercial glass recycling program
● Inventing a vortex water fountain
● Studying game theory and human behavior
● Building a microkernel (coding)
● Constructing aquaponic and hydroponic gardens

Design Thinking and Maker Spaces. Design thinking is an inquiry process revolving
around making things from digital apps to eco-friendly clothes in a “maker space”.
Projects usually require the application of technology along with low-tech tools. Tools
in Zoe Brannigan-Pipe’s classroom include a 3-D printer, Lego, Minecraft and sewing
machines. (You can access Zoe’s work at Pipedreams http:/integratedcurriculum/
pipedreams-education.ca/). Students follow a defined procedure which allows for
creativity coupled with structure for accountability. Maker spaces, by definition, involve
different subject areas and thus, an integrated curriculum works well here. Students can
develop innovation and entrepreneurial skills. Often the work is collaborative and
working with the needs of others involves empathy and communication skills.

Technology. Although competencies have been recognized for a long time in

education, it is ICT as a core competency that is propelling general capabilities into
prominence (Voogt, Erstad, Dede, & Mishra, 2013). Digital literacy includes the Be
where students need to learn to be a digital citizen. Technology pushes a topic beyond
a defined subject area and will usually include the real-world context that by its nature
is integrated.
As thoughtful educators know, technology cannot be about the bells and whistles; it
should be used to enhance learning, increase engagement and improve academic
achievement. Technology promotes global connections. Students may connect with
experts and share their work with anyone around the world. Through various digital
platforms such as virtual manipulatives and augmented realities, students can creatively
represent complex concepts (Dede, 2014; Henriksen, Mishra, & Fisser, 2016). Students
can communicate and collaborate through programs such as Googledocs, Voicethread,
interactive games, interactive maps, and graphing tools, Students can join an organization
that has already established global connections and collaborative inquiries.
Technology gives teachers extended opportunities to engage students by connecting
curriculum to life outside the classroom. One of the most well-known organizations that
Susan M. Drake⋅Joanne L. Reid 43

promote global connection is the non-profit iEarn (https://iearn.org/). There are over 100
ongoing projects in subject areas or are interdisciplinary. Current projects in South
Korea involve https://iearn.org/country/iearn-south-korea. For example, through the support
of the Japan Korea Cultural Exchange Foundation and Hyogo International Exchange
Association, iEARN-Japan and iEARN-Korea completed three exchange programs.

Focusing on the Be. Character education is a fundamental capability seen in some

form in most competency frameworks. Character education is the Be. Consider Korea
where “The educated person is one who is, among other things, a creative community
member who leads a dignified life based on understanding cultural knowledge and
pluralistic values” (The School Curriculum of the Republic of Korea, 2009, p. 2). This
person is an individual who thinks creatively, takes up new challenges, participates in
community development, and considers others. Each country may interpret the goals of
character education differently, but perhaps Singapore sums it up well with the slogan,
“Do good and be good.”
Character education can be addressed separately or woven through each course in an
integrated way. Socio-emotional learning (SEL) is learning that includes self-awareness,
self-management, social awareness, relationship skills with others and responsible
decision-making (Vega, 2012a). SEL programs help students develop these traits. Popular
evidence-based SEL programs such as Responsive Classroom Approach, Second Step,
Meditation, Service Learning, and School-wide Positive Behavior Report demonstrate a
strong link between enhanced social-emotional skills and academic performance (Vega,
2012a; Vega, 2012b). The CASEL Program Guides (http://www.casel.org/guide/) offer a
systematic way to evaluate evidence-based social and emotional programs for all age
levels.
Metacognition and self-direction are also qualities associated with school success.
Metacognition is the ability to think about one’s thinking. Metacognitive strategies can
be taught specifically as the following standard for reading suggests:

explain which of a variety of strategies they [students] found most helpful before, during,
and after reading, then evaluate their strengths and weaknesses as readers to help identify
the steps they can take to improve their skills (e.g., record their reflections about how
often and how proficiently they use various strategies; set targets for improving their use
of particular strategies; confer with the teacher to develop new strategies for
understanding more challenging texts.
(The Ontario Curriculum Grades 11 and 12, English, 2007, p. 49)
44 Integrated Curriculum as an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century Capabilities

Recently qualities such as intellectual curiosity, grit, and wellbeing are receiving
increased attention. Teachers can address these characteristics through specific programs
or in a teachable moment. The assessment for learning (AfL) movement is focused on
building a growth mindset in students through feedback (Dweck, 2006). Growth mindset
rests on the premise of brain plasticity rather than fixed abilities; the brain can
continuously grow and develop given the proper environment. For learning, this
environment is reflected in teacher feedback that focuses on perseverance and effort,
and metacognitive reflection rather than on innate talent.
Perhaps one of the best ways that we have seen of giving proper attention to the Be
is through the International Baccalaureate (IB) schools. There are over 4000 such
schools around the world, both public and private. The goal of all IB schools is that
students be internationally-minded, active, responsible citizens. In the unifying framework
for the IB schools for all grade levels there is a Learner Profile (http://www.ibo.org/
benefits/learner-profile/). This Learner Profile describes students as open-minded,
reflective, principled, caring, balanced, communicator, risk-taker, inquirers, knowledgeable,
and thinkers. In schools that we have been to and/or done research in, the learner
profile permeates the culture. There are visual representations of the characteristics
sprinkled liberally around the school and the classrooms. Assignments ask students to be
reflective and often zero in on a specific quality such as risk-taking and how a student
is demonstrating it.

Assessment. A benefit of curriculum integration is that assessment can be more

efficient because more than one subject can be assessed in one task, and capabilities
can be assessed in more than one subject. This is particularly true when there is
feedback only, not grades, as is recommended in assessment for learning (AfL). But
when a grade is required, assessment can be a challenge. This is why it is so important
to have operational definitions of the capabilities and accompanying rubrics that identify
criteria and levels of performance. Since some of the criteria for competencies could be
difficult to assess, it is important to triangulate the data for assessment (Hendriksen,
Mishra, & Fisser, 2016). There are resources now that focus on how to assess 21st
Century competencies (see, for example, Brookhart, 2010 and Greenstein, 2012).
On the other hand, a requirement to grade the capabilities will make them more
important. In Ontario, the 21st Century competencies will replace the learning skills on
future report cards, thus giving the competencies more prominence. Recently OECD
(2017), known for testing literacy, math, and science, released results for collaborative
Susan M. Drake⋅Joanne L. Reid 45

problem-solving. This was the first large-scale test of its kind and may foreshadow a
future where the competencies become as important as core subject areas. This follows
the old adage that what is assessed is what is valued, and vice versa.
Students can and should become participants in the assessment process. They can
co-create their assessment tasks and marking criteria with their teacher. This provides all
the more reason why the criteria for competencies need to be clear and transparent.
Students can gather evidence of, and reflect on their learning progress through a
portfolio of artefacts such as work products, photographs, video and audio recordings.
This collection is “pedagogical documentation” (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2015).
Originating in early primary as a way to capture student learning, pedagogical
documentation is useful technique for students of all ages.
Aviva Dunsiger of Ontario is a teacher who teaches the capabilities within an
integrated curriculum. She also embeds her assessment into the instructional activities
using AfL and pedagogical documentation. Here is one example from her classroom.
Students completed a project on organ systems. First, they researched various organ
systems and then used design thinking to create a working model of one of the organs
they were studying. The models were constructed from objects found in the outside
environment and home. Students also created audio recordings to explain to a viewer
how their organ actually worked, and a video of themselves to explain the application
of the stages for design thinking. They transformed the classroom into a human body
where all the systems were present and working together. For the final performance
task, teachers and students from other classes visited and asked questions. Students
demonstrated scientific knowledge, literacy skills, inquiry, design thinking, creativity, and
communication skills. Aviva’s adventures can be found on her blog Avivaloca at
https://adunsiger.com/.

Conclusion

Currently, capabilities are acknowledged as necessary for successful 21st Century living
and should be a central focus of curriculum. Teachers think the competencies are
important, and think that they already develop them in their classroom (van de
Oudeweetering & Voogt, 2017). At the same time, many teachers feel overwhelmed by
the scale and pace of educational reforms (Loewus, 2017). So how can we encourage
educators to give competencies the attention they deserve?
46 Integrated Curriculum as an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century Capabilities

We offer recommendations that we believe will help move forward the implementation
of teaching the capabilities for 21st Century learning and teaching. First, we agree with
Voogt and Roblin (2012) who recommend beginning with operational definitions of the
competencies. Clarification would include describing what competencies look like at
progressive levels of development for students at different age levels. These definitions
will help determine a pedagogical continuum for teaching and assessing competencies
across age levels and subjects (Voogt, Shin, Mishra, Koehler, Schmidt, Baran,
Thompson, Wang, Alayyar, Fisser, Agyei, Ormel, Velthuis, Tondeur, & Gibson, 2011).
Voogt and Roblin also correctly call for the identification of connections between core
subjects and 21st Century capabilities.
Australia has begun this process by developing definitions and performance criteria
for general capabilities. The performance criteria could serve as an evaluation rubric.
For example, a rubric for critical and creative thinking could include the following
categories based on the definition:
1. Inquiry- identifying, exploring and organizing information
2. Generating ideas - possibilities and actions
3. Analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating reasoning and procedures
4. Reflecting on thinking and processes (https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-
curriculum/general-capabilities/critical-and-creative-thinking/).

Second, we recommend that curriculum planners begin with a unifying framework

that provides the big picture and presents the capabilities as a backdrop for lesson or
unit plans. This process recognizes the KDB and insures that the competencies are at
the forefront.
Third, we urge educators to consider using an integrated approach to curriculum, if
not all the time, at appropriate times. Again, we agree with Voogt and Roblin (2012)
that working with dynamic and relevant interdisciplinary themes is important and
reinforces our premise that teaching integrated skills with an integrated curriculum is
effective pedagogy.
Finally, as a forward-looking action, we recommend that there be more direct
teaching about competencies in teacher preparation programs and more ongoing
professional development for practicing educators. We suggest that materials be
developed that illustrate what the capabilities look like in action. In Ontario, for
example, video clips have been created by MISA London that offer the criteria for a
learning skill and then show situations in which the skill is being developed; these
Susan M. Drake⋅Joanne L. Reid 47

videos act as exemplars (http://misalondon.ca/assessment-evaluation/learning-skills/). This

type of tool can be expanded to demonstrate what capabilities look like in practice and
provide levels of performance.
The emerging importance of the capabilities and their actual implementation depend
upon many factors. Certainly, challenges lie ahead, but we believe that adopting
curriculum integration to some extent can ease the implementation process. Easy or not,
the need to address 21st Century competencies in our classrooms is pressing.

References

Aikin, W. (1942). The Story of the eight-year study. New York, NY: Harper.
Barr, D. J., Boulay, B., Selman, R. L., McCormick, R., Lowenstein, E., Gamse, B., Fine, M., &
Leonard, M. B. (2015). A randomized controlled trial of professional development for
interdisciplinary civic education: Impacts on humanities teachers and their students.
Teachers College Record, 172. http//www.tcrecord.org
Bialik, M., Bogan, M., Fadel, C., & Horvathova, M. (2015). Character education for the 21st
century: What should students learn? Boston, MA: Center for Curriculum Redesign.
www.curriculumredesign.org
Boehme, A. (2017, November). Teaching competencies for 21st Century learning. Presentation
made to EDUC 5P42 Education. Oakville, ON: Brock University.
Boehme, A., Crawford, P., Murray, K., Stolys, K., & Strangway, L. (2017). Measuring What
Matters: Teachers assessing competencies in creativity, social-emotional learning,
health, and citizenship, People for Education’s Making Connections Conference 2017.
November 11, 2017, University of Toronto Rotman School of Business, Toronto, ON.
Brookhart, S. (2010). How to assess higher-order thinking skills in your classroom.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Cameron, D., Watkins, E., & Kidder, A. (2016, November 12). Measuring What Matters;
Progress Report, Phase 3: 2015-2016. Toronto: People for Education.
Camillus, J. (2008, May). Strategy as a wicked problem. Harvard Business Review
https://hbr.org/2008/05/strategy-as-a-wicked-problem
Chu, S. K. W., Reynolds, R. B. Tavares, N. J., Notari, M., & Lee, C. W. Y. (2017). Twenty-first
century skills and global roadmaps Chapter 2. In S. Chu, R. Reynolds, N. Tavares, M.
Notari, C. Lee (Eds.), 21st century skills development through inquiry based learning:
48 Integrated Curriculum as an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century Capabilities

From theory to practice (pp. 17-32). Singapore: Springer Science+Business Media

doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-2481-8_2
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience in education. New York, NY: Collier Books.
Dede, C. (2010). Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills. 21st Century skills: Rethinking
How Students Learn, 20, 51–76.
Drake, S. M. & Reid, J. (2010, Sept). Integrated curriculum: Increasing relevance while
maintaining accountability. What Works? Research into Practice. Toronto: Ontario
Ministry of Education.
Drake, S. M., Reid, J. L., & Kolohon, W. (2014). Interweaving curriculum and classroom
assessment: Engaging the 21st Century Learner. Toronto, ON: Oxford University
Press.
Drake, S. M. & Savage, M. F. (2016). Negotiating accountability and integrated curriculum in a
global context. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research,
15(6). http://www.ijlter.org/index.php/ijlter/article/view/639
Drake, S. M., Savage, M., Reid, J., Bernard, M., & Beres, J. (2015, Nov) An Exploration of the
Policy and Practice of Transdisciplinarity in the IB PYP Programme. The Hague:
International Baccalaureate.
http://www.ibo.org/globalassets/publications/ib-research/pyp/an-exploration-of-the-poli
cy-and-practice-of-transdisciplinarity-in-the-pyp-final-report.pdf.
Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. How we can learn to fulfill our
potential. New York: Random House.
Fullan, M. (2013). Stratosphere. Toronto, ON: Pearson.
Greenstein, L. (2012). Assessing 21st century skills: A guide to evaluating mastery and
authentic learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Häkkinena, P., Järveläb, S., Mäkitalo-Sieglc, K., Ahonena, A., Näykkib, P., & Teemu Valtonend,
T. (2016). Preparing teacher-students for twenty-first-century learning practices (PREP
21): A framework for enhancing collaborative problem-solving and strategic learning
skills, Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 23(1), 25–41.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2016.1203772
Halinen, I. (2016). Curriculum reform in Finland: Finnish National Board of Education.
Presentation at Opetushallitus Conference (OPS) \2016.
http://www.oph.fi/download/151294_ops2016_curriculum_reform_in_finland.pdf
Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., & Fisser, P. (2016). Infusing creativity and technology in 21st Century
education: A systemic view for change. Journal of Educational Technology & Society,
19(3), 27-37.
Susan M. Drake⋅Joanne L. Reid 49

Jacobs, H. (Ed.). (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: design and implementation. Alexandria,

VA: ASCD.
Kuhlthau, C., Maniotes, L., & Caspari, A. (2015). Guided inquiry: Learning in the twenty-first
century (2nd ed.). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Loewus, L. (2017). Majority of teachers say reforms have been ‘too much’. Education Week. Dec 17.
https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2017/12/19/majority-of-teachers-say-reforms-have
-been.html?cmp=eml-enl-eu-news1&M=58318506&U=1107446
MacMath, S., Roberts, J., Wallace, J. & Chi, X. (2009). Curriculum integration and at-risk
students: A Canadian case study examining student learning and motivation. British
Journal of Special Education, 37(2), 87-94. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8578.2009.00454.x
McNaughton, M. (2014). From acting to action: Developing global citizenship through Global
Storylines drama. The Journal of Environmental Education, 45(1), 16-36.
Minister of Education, Science and Technology Korea. (2009). The School Curriculum of the
Republic of Korea. NationalCurriculum-English2008.pdf
OECD. (2017). PISA 2015 Results (Volume V) Collaborative Problem Solving, PISA. Paris:
OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264285521-en
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2015). Pedagogical documentation revisited. Capacity building
series. Toronto, ON: Queens Park. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/
inspire/research/CBS_PedagogicalDocument.pdf
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2016). 21st Century Competencies: Foundation Document for
Discussion. http://www.edugains.ca/resources21CL/About21stCentury/21CL_21stCentury
Competencies.pdf
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2007). The Ontario Curriculum Grades 11 and 12, English,
Toronto: The Queen’s Printer. www.edu.gov.on.ca
Rotherham. A. J. & Willingham, D. (2009). 21st Century skills The challenges ahead, Educational
Leadership, 67(1), 16-21.
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept09/vol67/num01/21st-Cent
ury-Skills@-The-Challenges-Ahead.aspx
Russell, C. & Burton, J. (2000). A report on an Ontario secondary school integrated environmental
studies program. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 5, 287-303.
Sill, D. J. (2001). Integrative thinking, synthesis and creativity in interdisciplinary studies. The
Journal of General Education, 50(4), 288‐ 311.
Silva, E. (2009). Measuring skills for 21st century learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(9), 630-634.
Smithrin, K. & Upitis, R. (2005). Learning through the arts: Lessons of engagement. Canadian
Journal of Education, 28(1 and 2), 109-127.
 50 Integrated Curriculum as an Effective Way to Teach 21st Century Capabilities

Thijs, A., Fisser, P., & Van der Hoeven, M. (2014). 21e eeuwse vaardigheden in het curriculum
van het funderend onderwijs [21st century skills in the curriculum of basic
education]. Enschede: SLO. [Google Scholar]
van de Oudeweetering, K. & Voogt, J. (2017). Teachers’ conceptualization and enactment of
twenty-first century competences: exploring dimensions for new curricula. The
Curriculum Journal, 1-18. doi: 10.1080/09585176.2017.1369136
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09585176.2017.1369136
Vega, V. (2012 a). Social and emotional research review. Schools that work: Edutopia.
http://www.edutopia.org/sel-research-learning-outcomespia.org
Vega, V. (2012 b). Social and emotional research review: Evidence-based programs. Schools that
work: Edutopia. http://www.edutopia.org/sel-research-evidence-based-programs
Venville, G., Sheffield, R., Rennie, L., & Wallace, J. (2008). The Writing on the wall: Classroom
context, curriculum implementation, and student learning in integrated, community-based
science projects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8), 857-880.
Voogt, J. & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st
century competencies: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of
Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321.
Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C., & Mishra, P. (2013). Challenges to learning and schooling in the
digital networked world of the 21st century. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,
29(5), 403–413.
Voogt, J., Shin, T., Mishra, P., Koehler, M., Schmidt, D., Baran, E., Thompson, A., Wang, W.,
Alayyar, G., Fisser, P., Agyei, D., Ormel, B., Velthuis, C., Tondeur, J. & Gibson, D. (2011).
Teachers’ assessment of TPACK: Where are we and what is needed? In M. Koehler & P.
Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher
Education International Conference 2011 (pp. 4422-4426). Chesapeake, VA: AAC.
Wiggins G. & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Yoon, S. Y., Dyehouse, M., Lucietto, A. M., Diefes-Dux, H. A., & Capobianco, B. M. (2014). The
effects of integrated science, technology, and engineering education on elementary
students’ knowledge and identity development. School Science and Mathematics,
114(8), 380-391.

Article History
Received on December 23, 2017 / Revised on January 29, 2018 / Accepted on January 30, 2018

View publication stats