Higher Education

, Volume 55, Issue 5, pp 575–591

Double degrees: double the trouble or twice the return?

Article

Abstract

Double degrees (also called joint or combined degrees)—programs of study combining two bachelor degrees—are increasingly popular in Australian universities, particularly among women. A case study using qualitative and quantitative surveys of current and past double degree students is presented. The study indicates that double degrees benefit students in providing a broad education and increasing skills and options. However, benefits are not fully realised because of administrative difficulties, lack of support and absence of ‘learning communities’. These problems arise because double degrees sit outside the disciplinary structure of universities. As such, however, double degrees have potential to provide transdisciplinary education. We suggest initiatives that would improve the experience, performance and persistence of double degree students. They would also build the skills of integration, boundary work, communication and teamwork associated with transdisciplinarity. These skills not only equip students for a range of employment; they are sorely needed in society.

Keywords

Double degrees Gender Interdisciplinarity Learning communities Student surveys Transdisciplinarity 

References

  1. Bammer, G. (2005). Guiding principles for integration in natural resource management (NRM) as a contribution to sustainability. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 12, 5–7.Google Scholar
  2. Barker, R. T. G., Glenn H., & Stone, Warren S. (1998). The interdisciplinary needs of organizations. Are new employees adequately equipped? The Journal of Management Development, 17(3), 219–232.Google Scholar
  3. Batson, C., Sharp, R., Ramsay, E., & Mackinnon, A. (2002). Equity group access and participation at the bachelor (honours/pass) level. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.Google Scholar
  4. Boucher, C., Smyth, A., & Johnstone, M.-J. (2004). Creating collaborative spaces: The pleasures and perils of doing multi-disciplinary, multi-partner qualitative research. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 26(3), 419–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Costanza, R. (1990). Escaping the overspecialisation trap: Creating incentives for a transdisciplinary synthesis. In M. E. Clark & S. A. Wawrytko (Eds.), Rethinking the curriculum: Toward an integrated interdisciplinary college education (pp. 95–106). New York: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dodge, L., & Kendall, M. E. (2004). Learning communities. College Teaching, 52(4), 150–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C., & Terra, B. R. C. (2000). The future of the university and the university of the future: Evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm. Research Policy, 29(2), 313–330.Google Scholar
  8. Gablenick, F., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R., & Smith, B. L. (1990). Learning communities: Creating connections among students, faculty and disciplines. San Francisco: Josey-Bass.Google Scholar
  9. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage publications.Google Scholar
  10. Grigg, D. L., Johnston, R., & Milsom, N. (2003). Emerging issues for cross-disciplinary research. The Department of Education, Science, and Training.Google Scholar
  11. Gunasekara, C. (2004). The third role of Australian universities in human capital formation. Journal of higher education policy and management, 26(3), 329–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hammer, M., & Soderqvist, T. (2001). Enhancing transdisciplinary dialogue in curricula development. Ecological Economics, 38, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. King, R. (2004). Globalization and the university. In R. King (Ed.), The University in the global age (pp. 45–66). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  14. Meppem, T., & Gill, R. (1998). Planning for sustainability as a learning concept. Ecological economics, 26, 121–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Neumann, R., Parry, S., & Becher, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in their disciplinary context: A conceptual analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 27(4), 405–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. North, S. (2005). Different values, different skills? A comparison of essay writing by students from arts and science backgrounds. Studies in Higher Education, 30(5), 517–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2003). ‘Mode 2’ revisited: The new production of knowledge. Minerva, 41, 179–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ramadier, T. (2004). Transdisciplinarity and its challenges: The case of urban studies. Futures, 36(4), 423–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rapport, D. J. (2000). Perspectives from natural and environmental sciences. In M. A. Sommerville & D. J. Rapport (Eds.), Transdisciplinarity: Recreating integrated knowledge. Oxford: EOLSS Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Rosenman, L. (1996). The broadening of university education: An analysis of entry restructuring and curriculum change options. Canberra: DEETYA (Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs.Google Scholar
  21. Russell, A.W. (2000). Forging new paths. Transdisciplinarity in universities. WiseNet Journal, 53, 14–15.Google Scholar
  22. Russell, A. W. (2005). No academic borders? Transdisciplinarity in university teaching and research. Australian Universities’ Review, 48(1), 35–41.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, A. R. J., & Christie, C. (2004). Facilitating transdisciplinary teamwork in dietetics education: A case study approach. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 104(6), 959–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Smith, C., & Bath, D. (2006). The role of the learning community in the development of discipline knowledge and generic graduate outcomes. Higher Education, 51, 259–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Temple, D. (1997). Schoolgirls excel at exams – then what? WISENet Journal, 43, 4–6.Google Scholar
  26. Thomas, K. (1988). Gender and the Arts/Science divide in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 13(2), 123–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thompson Klein, J., Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W., Häberli, R., Bill, A., Scholz, R. W., & Welti, M. (2001). Transdisciplinarity: Joint problem solving among science, technology and society (332 pp). City: Birkhäuser: Basel.Google Scholar
  28. Thompson Klein, J. (2004). Prospects for Transdisciplinarity. Futures, 36(4), 515–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 68(6), 599–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wickson, F., Carew, A., & Russell, A. W. (2006). Transdisciplinary research: Characteristics, quandaries and quality. Futures, 38(9), 1046–1059.Google Scholar
  31. Winberg, C. (2006). Undisciplining knowledge production: Development driven higher education in South Africa. Higher Education, 51, 159–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Wendy Russell
    • 1
  • Sara Dolnicar
    • 2
  • Marina Ayoub
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of WollongongWollongongAustralia
  2. 2.School of Management and MarketingUniversity of WollongongWollongongAustralia

Personalised recommendations