Arts integration research has focused on documenting how the teaching of specific art forms can be integrated with ‘core’ academic subject matters (e.g. science, mathematics and literacy). However, the question of how the teaching of multiple art forms themselves can be integrated in schools remains to be explored by educational researchers. This paper draws on data collected at a secondary school in Singapore. The case study analyses how three art teachers, using the idea of ‘space’ as organizing theme, implemented a module of instruction that connected concepts and processes from a variety of art forms (including dance, music, drama and visual arts). We present evidence from curriculum materials, lesson plans, student–teacher classroom interactions and students’ productions. Students were able to reflect upon the importance of space within the arts, analyse the points of convergence and divergence among several art forms, experiment with space and create their own interdisciplinary performances. Our ultimate aim is to provide insights that might inspire art teachers in designing instructional units focused on ‘big ideas’. We suggest that allowing more curricular freedom and providing teachers with adequate structures for interdisciplinary collaboration are key to achieving meaningful levels of integration.

Singapore’s strong performance in international benchmarking studies – Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) – poses a conundrum to researchers who view Singapore’s pedagogy as characterized by the teaching of facts and procedures, and lacking in constructivist learning principles. In this paper, we examine the impact of different curriculum innovations on critical thinking as measured by the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Assessment – UK (WGCTA-UK). This includes two innovations that are subject-specific and short-term, one that strongly infuses the arts into the curriculum throughout the whole course of study, and the innovation of the Integrated Programme (IP) which allows academically stronger students to skip the GCE “O” Levels and enter directly into the next level of education, with the time previously allocated to exam preparation now spent on greater breadth in the academic and non-academic curriculum. This paper takes the sociocultural approach to investigate the contexts, process, and outcomes, reports the state of critical thinking, and sheds light on how critical thinking is being promoted. Through our analysis, we find support for the claim that only curriculum that is rigorously designed to foster critical thinking competencies will reap the intended student outcome.

Researchers have argued for the importance of the classroom context in developing students’ creative potential. However, the emphasis on a performative learning culture in the classroom does not favour creativity. Thus, how creative potential can be realised as one of the educational goals in the classrooms remains a key question. This study measured creativity across three secondary schools using the Wallach-Kogan Creative Thinking Test (WKCT). A total of 283 students enrolled in the Express programme and 290 students enrolled in the Integrated Programme (IP) volunteered in the study. The same cohort of students took the 38-item WKCT twice; once at the beginning of Secondary One and then at the end of Secondary Three. Four aspects of creativity, namely fluency, flexibility, unusualness, and uniqueness, were investigated. Our analyses showed that (i) IP students showed a greater increase in scores over time when compared to Express students; (ii) when Programme and PSLE (Primary School Leaving Examination) were used to predict creativity scores in a multiple regression, the predictive power of Programme increased from Secondary 1 to Secondary 3 while that of PSLE decreased; and (iii) flexibility scores were more resistant to change than fluency scores. These findings suggest that the classroom context matters and that the removal of high-stakes examination can provide room for the development of creative potential.

A common pedagogical approach to foster creativity and develop talents among gifted students is after-school enrichment programs. However, in practice, there are several issues concerning the conceptualization and implementation of such programs. Since these enrichment programs are typically not part of the core curriculum and scheduled outside curriculum time, these programs are relatively low stakes. As an after-school add-on program, such programs tend to be fragmented and ad hoc in nature. Instead of a systematic program designed to stretch gifted and talented students, with the goal of developing their knowledge and competencies in breadth and depth, the programs that are implemented tend to be pitched at exposure level. To effectively meet the needs of the gifted and talented students, it is imperative to examine the intricacies of these programs. The fidelity has significant implications on the quality of the students’ learning experiences. This article shares the issues and challenges they faced.