This quasi-experimental study investigates the effects of integrated learning of mathematics and science on eight student variables, comparing it to a control group. Despite numerous arguments supporting integrated learning, empirical evidence of its benefits is limited. The findings reveal that integrated learning is not a universal solution; it produces both positive and negative effects on specific outcomes. Notably, it enhances students' perceptions of the relationship between mathematics and science, while negatively impacting their scientific self-concept. Consequently, integrated learning should serve as a complement to, rather than a replacement for, traditional disciplinary learning.
