"In the real world, people's lives are not separated into separate subjects..."

..."it only seems logical that subject areas should not be separated in schools" (Czerniak, 1999).
I've been discovering recently how poorly American students perform in science and math in comparison to their peers in other countries. With reform on the horizon, curriculum integration sounds like a good way to achieve "meaningful learning and deep understanding" (whatever meaningful learning is. I'm still not sure how meaningfulness is measured?) by the student. Although many educators agree that it's needed, the article mentions how hard it is to define what, exactly, integration is and how it can be achieved. I don't think you can mesh science and math to the point where the two subjects cannot be distinguished from one another, or "tomato soup". Perhaps it can be achieved through team teaching. My dad is a science teacher and regularly attends team teaching meetings, where all of the 8th grade teachers get together to try to plan out their lessons so that similar concepts or ideas can be taught in a logical manner. For example, while my dad is teaching genetics in science class, the math teacher is teaching probability in math class. Ta-da! Seems both logical and easy.

That's not to say that there aren't obstacles, or that team teaching is the sole component of an integrated curriculum. It will take time, effort, reorganization of the school day, and educating preservice teachers in integrated classes (thanks, Ohio State!) but it feels to me like it's a good move. I liked the article very much, lots to think about.