By Chris Caton, IU 3 PIIC Mentor

You’ve probably heard a sports announcer refer to an athlete as being “in the zone.” Typically, this is when that individual is performing at an extremely high level and he or she will not be deterred by any outside forces. It really refers to having a singular focus. I would occasionally have days like this as a teacher. These were the days when I had an engaging lesson with few outside distractions, and the business of the school as a whole disappeared outside the four walls of my classroom. I loved these days when I was “in the zone.” Nothing existed outside my classroom. The problem with this is that it’s not the truth and it’s not real life. There is a much wider world outside of the four walls of our classrooms, and we as teachers occasionally forget that fact.

In a 1996 joint position statement, the National Council of Teachers of English, International Reading Association, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Speech Communication Association, and Council for Elementary Science International asserted a child's school day should not be divided by content areas since that does not reflect life in our society (National Council of Teachers of English, International Reading Association, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Speech Communication Association & Council for Elementary Science International, 1996). We do not live in a world that is divided by subject areas. Our lives are infused with bits of history, math, language arts, family and consumer science, and any number of other subject headings. To be successful, an individual has to pull the correct skills and knowledge from each of these areas in order to negotiate through their day. We all know this and yet our schools continue, for the most part, to instruct each subject in a vacuum.

This, however, is not always the case. Some brave teachers have ventured out of their classroom doors. Some have gone as far as the history wing or the science wing. The bravest have journeyed to the art and music classrooms. They have gone in search of their colleagues who might partner with them to develop interdisciplinary units of study. They have opened themselves to the idea that there is a relationship between subject areas that can provide a deeper understanding for their students. By understanding how scientific breakthroughs fit into history and by reading the literature of that time, a student can begin to understand the context of the situation in a way that might not otherwise occur.

Breaking down these walls is not easy. There are personalities, biases, and traditions standing in the way of this kind of change. Most teachers won’t readily walk down the hall and upset the balance; I certainly didn’t. I was happy to be “in the zone”; my zone. Interdisciplinary teaching doesn’t happen without a little help, and instructional coaches are the most apt people for the job. Coaches can get aerial view of who is doing what and who might be open to such an idea. By bringing just two people together successfully, a coach can begin a snowball effect of collaboration. When something is successful other people will want to be a part of it. Through strong consultation between coach and teachers employing the PIIC BDA model, the chances of this success is greatly increased. It is exciting to see a student make the connection between subjects or even just to have them say, “This is just like what we are talking about in my other class.”

The hidden benefit is the collaboration among the teachers and the community that can be created through this venture. By bridging the gaps between subject areas and by moving teachers beyond their four walls, coaches can foster dialogue around teaching. It is difficult to make such a cultural change and it almost never happens overnight. Interdisciplinary teaching can be a catalyst in this process.