A Proposed Multidisciplinary Framework for
Integrating Cognitive and Affective Standards
Presented by Hasanah Alfie & Jassie Teo
Raffles Girls’ School (Secondary)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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).
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 Simmons suggested the integration of character
education with academic content areas as “a way of bolstering character
education and academic learning.”
Literature Review
Stiff-Williams’ (2010) 5 steps for achieving the integration between
character education and learning standards:
1. Identify the values and character emphases that reflect community consensus and show
how good decision-making is at the basis of all these values.
2. Guide teachers in analyzing state standards to determine teaching targets and identify
character education emphases, such as decision-making, that relate to the targets.
3. Provide staff training and planning time for teachers to design unit plans that meld state
standards and character education teaching
4. Support teachers in the implementation of lesson activities that emphasise state standards
and character development learning experiences.
5. Promote the use of performance-based assessments, such as observation
instruments and scoring rubrics that can effectively evaluate aspects of character
development.
Methodology
Qualitative Analysis
 An integration framework was created by mapping the CLE outcomes to
the academic outcomes of the three subjects.
 A focus group discussion with 8 Year 3 students 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 81 Year 3 students (random sampling).
Findings: Integration Framework
EL & CLE
Academic Outcomes (Cognitive
Teachings)
Character Leadership Education
Outcomes (Affective Teachings)
English Language
Assessment Criteria
Demonstrates awareness of the
rhetorical situation
(K) Evaluate issues of current concern in
the community
(purpose, audience and context)
(K) Acknowledge and understand
Singapore’s constraints and
vulnerabilities as a small state
CLE Topic:
Active and Socially
Responsible Citizens
CLE Unit: Civic Literacy
(S) Reflect on and react to the needs of
the community
(S) Engage with and think critically
about national / global issues that
concern them and the community at
large
Findings: Integration Framework
EL & CLE
Academic Outcomes (Cognitive
Teachings)
Character Leadership Education
Outcomes (Affective Teachings)
English Language
Assessment Criteria
Uses rhetorical devices
effectively to engage the
audience
(K) Understand how their VIEW profile
applies to their personal / leadership
development
CLE Topic:
Reflective & Visionary
Leaders
CLE Unit: Civic Leadership
Uses non-verbal cues
(uses natural and appropriate gestures /
body posture / facial expressions;
maintains eye contact to engage the
audience throughout)
Findings: Integration Framework
EL & CLE
Academic Outcomes (Cognitive
Teachings)
Character Leadership Education
Outcomes (Affective Teachings)
English Language
Assessment Criteria
Speaks with clarity
(K) Understand The Leadership
Challenge as practices for leadership
development in relation to their LPI
scores
CLE Topic:
Reflective & Visionary
Leaders
CLE Unit: Civic Leadership
(pronunciation and articulation are
consistently accurate and clear; speaks
with good pace.)
Speaks expressively
(Varies pitch and tone effectively; uses
rhythm and stress strategically to
emphasise key ideas and captivate the
audience)
(S) Identify their own leadership
strengths and areas for improvement
Findings: Integration Framework
SS & CLE
Academic Outcomes (Cognitive
Teachings)
Character Leadership Education
Outcomes (Affective Teachings)
Social Studies
Assessment Criteria
Assesses impact of advocacy
Effort
(K) Understand that everyone has a
responsibility to ensure that rights are
enjoyed by all
CLE Topic:
Active and Socially
Responsible Citizens
(astutely assesses the impact of the
advocacy effort, synthesising diverse
stakeholders’ perspectives)
CLE Unit: Civic Literacy
(K) Learn the need to respect diversity
and the need for social harmony
(S) integrate perspectives and
experiences of others in group and
community decisions
Findings: Integration Framework
SS & CLE
Academic Outcomes (Cognitive
Teachings)
Character Leadership Education
Outcomes (Affective Teachings)
Social Studies
Assessment Criteria
Clarifies markers’ doubts during
Q and A
CLE Topic:
Good Stewards of Their
Lives
(skilfully answers questions; responses
compellingly enhance credibility of
the effort)
(K) Identify win-win situations and
explain why win-win solutions are
desirable as opposed to win-lose and
lose-lose
CLE Unit: Interpersonal
Effectiveness
Findings: Integration Framework
Philo & CLE
Academic Outcomes (Cognitive
Teachings)
Character Leadership Education
Outcomes (Affective Teachings)
Philosophy Assessment
Criteria
Constructs argument(s) for own
position
(S) Identify the factors which affect
their emotions, thoughts and actions
CLE Topic: Good Stewards
of their Lives
(constructs argument(s) with no
fallacies, and fully acknowledges
weaknesses / limitations of
argument(s) made where appropriate)
(S) Evaluate one’s strengths,
weaknesses, values and attitudes
CLE Unit: Personal
Effectiveness
Findings: Integration Framework
Philo & CLE
Academic Outcomes (Cognitive
Teachings)
Character Leadership Education
Outcomes (Affective Teachings)
Philosophy Assessment
Criteria
Applies at least one ethical
approach to advocated cause
Topic: Reflective and
Visionary Leaders
(applies at least one ethical approach
effectively and clearly to advocated
cause)
(K) Understand the concept of integrity
and ethics and why it is important in
leadership
CLE Unit: Civic Leadership
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
ASRC
RVL
GSTL
Minimum
2.13
Maximum
4.00
Mean
3.08
S.D
0.42
2.00
2.20
3.67
4.00
2.76
3.17
0.38
0.41
Findings: Items that scored below the average of 3.00
Active & Socially Responsible Citizens
•
The task has provided me with the opportunity to understand Singapore’s
constraints and vulnerabilities as a small state.
2.67
•
I was able to address the needs of the community through the task.
2.78
Reflective & Visionary Leaders
•
I considered my VIEW profile in planning my delivery style.
1.79
•
I applied my knowledge of the five practices of the Leadership Challenge to my
delivery style.
2.01
•
I was able to identify my own leadership strengths and weaknesses when
working on my delivery style.
2.67
•
The task has provided me with the opportunity to understand the concept of
integrity and ethics.
2.79
Good Stewards of Their Lives
•
Constructing the argument for the task helped me understand my emotions and
thoughts better.
2.95
•
I was effective in proposing win-win solutions for the community in my speech.
2.84
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 between being a good leader (CLE) and
having 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.
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.”
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.”
Findings & Discussion: Test Scores Analysis
Mean, Median, Mode & Std Deviation for the 3 Subjects
N
EL Total Score
454
SS Total Score
454
Philo Total Score
454
Mean
Median
Mode
72.51
70
65
73.86
75
75
67.70
62.5
75
Std Dev
11.88
10.70
14.95
Findings: Correlation between the 3 Subjects
All have significant
correlation:
- highest between EL
and SS at .549
- lowest between EL
and PH at .189
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”
Findings (1c) – Correlation between Task
Performance & Survey Results
Significant positive correlation between the performance in all 3 subjects
and students’ perception.
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, a better understanding of the affective dimension of the task
enables students to perform better in the academic criteria.
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 scores suggests considerable
synergy among the 3 subjects in this multidisciplinary approach.
 However, compatibility does not guarantee students’ reception towards the
integration.
Conclusions
 Nevertheless, the positive relationship between the test performance &
survey results suggests that:
(1) Students who have a better grasp of the academic requirements are
better able to perceive the affective dimension of the task.
(2) Or, a better understanding of the affective dimension of the task enables
students to perform better in the academic criteria.
 Both explanations, although inconclusive in this research point towards
the benefit of a closer link between the 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.
Recommendations
1. List the academic outcomes of the subjects concerned.
Check for subject complementarity.
2. Map the academic outcomes of the subjects to the CLE
outcomes. Ensure sufficient coverage of affective outcomes.
3. Design a performance task that captures both academic and
CLE outcomes in an authentic manner.
4. Ensure that there is explicit connection between affective
and cognitive skills and knowledge during lessons.
5. Provide opportunities for teachers to evaluate aspects of
character development (e.g. service learning projects).