A Proposed Multidisciplinary Framework for Integrating Cognitive and Affective Standards

1. A Proposed Multidisciplinary Framework for Integrating Cognitive and Affective Standards Presented by Hasanah Alfie & Jassie Teo Raffles Girls’ School (Secondary)

2. Introduction • Effective individuals are those are able to apply both affective and cognitive skills in a given situation.(Covey 1989; Goleman 1995). • However, the implementation of the Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) programme is often perceived to be separate from the teaching of academic subjects.

3. Introduction The case in RGS: • Character education is known as Character & Leadership Education (CLE). • Its curriculum includes topics such as Active & Socially Responsible Citizenship, Reflective & Visionary Leadership, Good Stewards of Their Lives, Cyber-wellness and Sexuality Education. • CLE lessons are conducted once a week by the Form Teacher, separate from academic subjects.

4. Introduction • A multidisciplinary approach provides the platform for integrating the teaching of academic subjects and CCE. • In this research, we aim to investigate how effective the use of a multidisciplinary approach in a speech assessment task had been in providing an opportunity for students to explore issues of leadership, ethics and civics in the context of social advocacy. • Findings of this research are useful to practitioners who wish to adopt a multidisciplinary approach to the integration of CCE and academic outcomes.

5. Introduction • About the Speech Task: • Year 3 students assumed the role of an advocate to address a social issue through the multiple disciplinary lenses of English Language, Social Studies and Philosophy. • Duration: 1 term (10 weeks) • Academic subjects were taught separately. • Scores for each of the academic subjects were reported separately.

6. Research Questions • Within the constraints of an existing school curriculum, how can the teaching of character education be integrated naturally with academic outcomes? • How effective is the use of a multidisciplinary approach in providing the platform for an integration between CLE and academic outcomes?

7. Literature Review • Growing importance of character education alongside academic excellence • “The value of high-quality character education has been associated with improved school climates, increased academic achievement, and improved human relations”(Solomon, Watson and Battistich, 2002). • Pivotal role of school in shaping students’ character development • Character education develops especially in childhood and adolescence (Damon 1988) and schools can also be “a developmental force” (Berkowitz and Grych, 2000; Lickona, 1991; Gottfredson, 2001).

8. Literature Review • Integration with academic content as an effective means of bolstering character education • Nucci cited research that found out that “effective moral education programs are integrated within the curriculum, rather than treated separately as special program or unit (Nucci, 1987) • When discussing the importance of student reflection on social and moral issues, Berkowitz and Simmonssuggested the integration of character education with academic content areas as “a way of bolstering character education and academic learning.”

9. Literature Review Stiff-Williams’ (2010) 5 steps for achieving the integration between character education and learning standards: • Identify the values and character emphases that reflect community consensus and show how good decision-making is at the basis of all these values. • Guide teachers in analyzing state standards to determine teaching targets and identify character education emphases, such as decision-making, that relate to the targets. • Provide staff training and planning time for teachers to design unit plans that meld state standards and character education teaching • Support teachers in the implementation of lesson activities that emphasise state standards and character development learning experiences. • Promote the use of performance-based assessments, such as observation instruments and scoring rubrics that can effectively evaluate aspects of character development.

10. Methodology • Qualitative Analysis • An integrationframework was created by mapping the CLE outcomes to the academic outcomesof the three subjects. • A focus group discussion with 8 Year 3students representing the 3 performance bands was conducted. Quantitative Analysis • Test scores for the 3 subjects of the entire level of students were subject to statistical analysis. • A survey, which aims to measure students’ perception of the degree of integration between CLE and academic outcomes,was carried out among 81Year 3students (random sampling).

11. Findings: Integration Framework

12. Findings: Integration Framework

13. Findings: Integration Framework

14. Findings: Integration Framework

15. Findings: Integration Framework

16. Findings: Integration Framework

17. Findings: Integration Framework

18. Findings:Survey Results To what extent do students perceive the Speech Task to be integrated with the CLE outcomes? CLE topics included in the survey: • Active and Socially Responsible Citizens (ASRC) • Reflective and Visionary Leaders (RVL) • Good Stewards of Their Lives (GSTL) N = 81

20. Findings: Items that scored below the average of 3.00 Active & Socially Responsible Citizens Reflective & Visionary Leaders Good Stewards of Their Lives

21. Findings & Discussion: FGD • Weak link with CLE;poor recollection of CLE outcomes • Stronger link between task and ASRC – able to articulate how the task helped them understand their role as a citizen • Weak link between task and RVL • Saw the connection betweenbeing a good leader (CLE)andhaving good communication skills (EL), as well as taking the initiative to help the community (SS) • However, they found it difficult to fit Philo requirements into the speech.

22. Findings & Discussion: FGD • Low perception of integration • “I didn’t really think how CLE would contribute to my understanding of advocacy. • “Scores would reflect the technical aspect [of advocacy].” • Limited opportunities for application in CLE • “CLE doesn't really help me grow as a person… (but) we made use of the skills we learn in CLE for the project. Eg. LEADING the way – how am I going to rally the people to get on board to help me with my ideas.”

23. Findings & Discussion: FGD • Low integration with CLE leadership focus • “It [persuasive speech task] didn’t come across as a project about leadership” • “Didn’t focus on the leadership part but how to convey my ideas clearly” Relevance of task to leadership • “Leaders should be aware of the situation of the minority. Leaders should contribute…address the problem” • “I learnt how to alter my goals to make my solution more realistic. So a good leader shouldn’t propose lofty ideas but realistic goals.”

24. Findings & Discussion: Test Scores Analysis Mean, Median, Mode & Std Deviation for the 3 Subjects

25. Findings:Correlation between the 3 Subjects All have significant correlation: • highest between EL and SS at .549 • lowest between EL and PH at .189

26. Findings & Discussion: Test Scores with FGD Links to FGD findings: • “EL & SS complement each other very well. Advocacy work is about understanding the needs of the community (SS) and about presentation skills to persuade people to support your cause” • “Philo scope is too narrow… the task is too contrived”

27. Findings (1c) – Correlation between Task Performance & Survey Results Significant positive correlation between the performance in all 3 subjects and students’ perception.

28. Findings:Correlation between Task Performance & Survey Results Question: Is there any perceivable relationships between how students performed in the Speech Task and their perception of the task's relatedness to the CLE outcomes?  • Significant positive correlation between the performance of all 3 subjects and students’ perception. • Students who did well for the assessment reported a clearer connection between the speech task and the CLE outcomes • Possible explanation: students who have a better grasp of the academic requirements are better able to perceive the affective dimension of the task.Or,abetter understanding of the affective dimension of the task enablesstudents to perform better in the academic criteria.

29. Conclusions • Research Question: How effective is the use of a multidisciplinary approach in providing the platform for an integration between CLE and academic outcomes? • Combination of multiple subjects allows for integration with a wider range of CLE outcomes. • The significant correlation between subject scoressuggests considerable synergy among the 3 subjects in this multidisciplinary approach. • However, compatibility does not guarantee students’ reception towards the integration.

30. Conclusions • Nevertheless,the positive relationship between the test performance & survey resultssuggests that: • Students who have a better grasp of the academic requirementsare better able to perceive the affective dimension of the task. • Or, abetter understanding of the affective dimension of the task enablesstudents to perform better in the academic criteria. • Both explanations, althoughinconclusive in this research point towards the benefit of a closer link betweenthe academic and affective outcomes. • Through this study, we have shown the possibility of integrating cognitive and affective outcomes with minimal disruptions to the existing curricular structure, through the use of a multidisciplinary approach.

31. Recommendations • List the academic outcomes of the subjects concerned. Check for subject complementarity. • Map the academic outcomes of the subjects to the CLE outcomes. Ensure sufficient coverage of affective outcomes. • Design a performance task that captures both academic and CLE outcomes in an authentic manner. • Ensure that there is explicit connection betweenaffective and cognitiveskills and knowledgeduring lessons. • Provide opportunities for teachers to evaluate aspects of character development (e.g. service learning projects).