This paper presents the outcomes of a study about the needs of teachers who are challenged by an integrated science curriculum being implemented in Rhineland Palatinate (Germany). The curriculum comes along with a new subject called Natural Sciences (“Naturwissenschaften”). It was established for students in grades 5 and 6, the “orientation level” after primary education, and combines an integrative approach to science with the national science standards and a focus on the development of student competencies. Moreover, a syllabus (“Rahmenlehrplan”) was written that provides plans and guidelines for the teachers who are expected to enact the integrated curriculum in the classroom. It introduces to the need of integrated teaching and lists thematic areas teachers are expected to consider for planning integrated lessons.

Integrated approaches in science education challenge traditional models for planning instruction. Lesson units are organized around integrative threads or “vehicles” (BSCS 2000, Bybee 2006) like issues, broad-based themes or contexts rather than the structure of the discipline. Integration often implies collaboration between teachers with different fields of study who teach different school subjects. In-service courses in Rhineland Palatinate were conducted to foster collaboration and allow teachers explore the use of integrative threads or vehicles rather than the structure of content knowledge for planning instruction. These courses also offer tools to help teachers assess students’ knowledge with respect to integrated subject matter.

Considering that teacher professional development is the most important tool to support the changes envisaged by a new curriculum, we ask here how they should be organized to help teachers acquire competencies for integration.  Are central courses or school-based in-service activities the best way to prepare teachers? What is the role of collaborative lesson planning in these courses? BSCS (2000) argue that new curriculum material can be both an effective vehicle for teacher learning and a tool for improving students’ scientific literacy. This raises the question of how curriculum materials are to be used to support teacher learning for the integrated curriculum.

Wishing to learn more about the impact of the various components of the new curriculum on classroom enactment, we also asked teachers to rate features of the syllabus.  Assuming that readability and clarity of the curriculum document have an impact on teacher readiness for change, we want to explore these issues in the context of an integrated science curriculum. Apart from these features, we wonder about the role of time and resources for teachers’ work that are provided in the syllabus.

Collaboration in subject groups provides the best opportunities for teacher learning as they directly clarify the benefits of change (Huber, Lange & Terhart 2003). They also should be the starting point for collaboration beyond the singe subject.  Considering these findings, the role of subject groups for the integrated curriculum is another focus of this study.

Huber, L.W.; Lange, H. &Terhart, W. (2003). Lehrer fördern. Vorstudie zur Deutschen Lehrerakademie. Golin Wissenschaftsmanagement: Hamburg. Hargreaves, A.; Earl, L.; Moore, S. & Manning, S. (2001). Learning to change. Teaching beyond Subjects and Standards. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco. Bybee, R.W. (2006). Teaching and Learning Science: Reflections on Integrated Approaches to the Curriculum. A presentation for the Institute for Integrated Science (IIS), Miamy University, Oxford, Ohio. BSCS (2000). Making sense of integrated science: A guide for high school. Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS.