Pursuing a Curriculum of Pursuing a Curriculum of Interdisciplinary StudiesInterdisciplinary Studies

Graham GarnerUndergraduate Curriculum • EDLH 732

Fall 2007

OverviewOverviewClassical Education

to Core CurriculumDivision of

DisciplinesQualities of

Interdisciplinary Work

Barriers: Obstacles to Coordination

Bridges: Cognitive Strategies

Integrative DepthContextualizationConceptualizationProblem-centeringAttitudes about

InterdisciplinarityAssessmentFuture of

Interdisciplinary Curriculum

Classical Education to Classical Education to Core CurriculumCore CurriculumClassics sought well-rounded

individuals◦“To be educated in any discipline, one

must know its basic facts (grammar); be able to think deeply about the subject (logic); and be able to act on that knowledge in a personal, original and independent way (rhetoric).“ (Veith, 1996)

Core curriculum is an evolution of the tradition

Disciplines developed, divided

Division of DisciplinesDivision of DisciplinesBarriers instead of bridgesDivided liberal education

◦Humanities◦Sciences◦Applied fields

Qualities of Qualities of Interdisciplinary WorkInterdisciplinary WorkIntegration is a means, not an

endDisciplinary expertise is

considered seriouslyDisciplines are intertwined, not

juxtaposed

Miller and Boix Mansilla, 2004

Barriers: Barriers: Obstacles to CoordinationObstacles to CoordinationDifferences in:

◦Units of analysis Multiple levels or units are potentially relevant Each perspective has its own useful

contribution

◦Language Terms have multiple meanings in context Asking for clarification means higher-order

rigor

◦Standards of acceptability Different disciplines offer conflicting and yet

internally coherent standards

Miller and Boix Mansilla, 2004

Bridges: Bridges: Cognitive StrategiesCognitive StrategiesReasoning through analogies

◦ Planetary orbits and subatomic particlesCreating compound concepts

◦ Terms bridge domains (biochemistry)Building complex and multi-causal

explanations◦ Lactose intolerance and coevolution

Advancing through checks and balances◦ Disciplines keep one another intellectually

honestBridging the explanation-action gap

◦ Some explain, some guide, some solveMiller and Boix Mansilla, 2004

Integrative DepthIntegrative DepthMutual Ignorance

◦Work in your own cornersStereotyping

◦Aware of others, even curious, but no depth

Perspective-taking◦Understand others and sympathize, and

perhaps even include in your own approach

Merging◦Revise and perhaps create hybrids

Miller and Boix Mansilla, 2004

ContextualizationContextualizationFocused on humanitiesEmbed material in time, culture,

personal experienceSeeks the methodological and

philosophical core of disciplinesAim is to understand self

Nikitina, 2006

ConceptualizationConceptualizationAssociated with sciencesIdentify core concepts and

connections between themAbstract physical data and

discover systemsMove beyond facts and theories

to underlying conceptsAim is to understand the natural

world

Nikitina, 2006

Problem-centeringProblem-centeringAssociated with applied fields,

including social sciencesTackle complex real-life problems

with knowledge and modes of thinking from a variety of disciplines

Aim is to take action and create change

Pragmatic approach can be narrowSolves problems

Nikitina, 2006

Attitudes about Attitudes about InterdisciplinarityInterdisciplinarityInterdisciplinarity is like taking vitaminsCompulsion for labels and categoriesResearchers feel a need to defend their

validityRequires intellectual and personal

negotiationMuch ambiguity and little common groundStumbling blocks

◦ PhDs: literature, colleagues, supervisors◦ Informal research groups◦ Research funding◦ Careers

Lau and Pasquini, 2004

AssessmentAssessmentTargeted Assessment Framework

◦Success is measured by degree to which the work achieves its purpose

Strong Disciplinary Grounding◦Appropriate selection, depth of perspective

Advancement through Integration◦Understanding advanced, knowledge

createdCritical Awareness

◦Clarity of purpose, understanding of limitation

Boix Mansilla and Dawes Duraising, 2007

Future of Future of Interdisciplinary Interdisciplinary CurriculumCurriculumTheme-basedCurricular sequenceTextsMethods coursesPhilosophy coursesConflict between structure and

openness

Welch, 2003

ReferencesReferences Boix Mansilla, Veronica and Elizabeth Dawes Duraising (2007,

March/April). Targeted assessment of students’ interdisciplinary work: An empirically grounded framework proposed. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(2), 215-237.

Lau, Lisa and Margaret W. Pasquini (2004). Meeting grounds: perceiving and defining interdisciplinarity across the arts, social sciences and sciences. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 29(1), 49-64.

Miller, Matthew and Veronica Boix Mansilla (2004, March). Thinking across perspectives and disciplines. Interdisciplinary Studies Project, Project Zero, Harvard Graduate School of Education.

Nikitina, S. (2006, June). Three strategies for interdisciplinary teaching: contextualizing, conceptualizing, and problem‐centring. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(3), 251-272.

Veith, Gene Edward (1996, November/December). A classical curriculum. Policy Review, 80, 60.

Welch, James IV (2003). Future directions for interdisciplinary effectiveness in higher education. Issues in Integrative Studies, 21, 170-203.