Innovative Higher Education

, Volume 27, Issue 2, pp 95–111 | Cite as

Interdisciplinary Learning: Process and Outcomes

  • Lana Ivanitskaya
  • Deborah Clark
  • George Montgomery
  • Ronald Primeau

Abstract

Interdisciplinary learning is characterized by the integration of multidisciplinary knowledge across a central program theme or focus. With repeated exposure to interdisciplinary thought, learners develop more advanced epistemological beliefs, enhanced critical thinking ability and metacognitive skills, and an understanding of the relations among perspectives derived from different disciplines. Our adaptation of Biggs and Collis' (1982) Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome illustrates the stages of interdisciplinary knowledge integration and explains corresponding patterns of learners' intellectual functioning, from acquisition of single-subject information to transfer of interdisciplinary knowledge to other topics, issues, or problems.

interdisciplinary learning critical thinking metacognition epistemology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ackerman, D. B. (1989). Intellectual and practical criteria for successful curriculum integration. In H. H. Jacobs (Ed.), Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. (pp. 25-38). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  2. Ackerman, D. B., & Perkins, D. N. (1989). Integrating thinking and learning skills across the curriculum. In H. H. Jacobs (Ed.), Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. (pp. 77-96). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  3. Acton, W. H., Johnson, P. J., & Goldsmith, T. E. (1994). Structural knowledge assessment: Comparison of referent structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 303-311.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychological Review, 89, 369-406.Google Scholar
  5. Baloche, L., Hynes, J. L., & Berger, H. A. (1996). Moving toward the integration of professional and general education. Action in Teacher Education, 18, 1-9.Google Scholar
  6. Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1992). Students' epistemologies and academic experiences: Implications for pedagogy. Review of Higher Education, 15, 265-287.Google Scholar
  7. Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (Eds.) (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: the SOLO taxonomy (Structure of the observed learning outcome). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  8. Blakey, E., & Spence, S. (1990). Developing metacognition. (Report No. EDO-IR-90-6). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED327218).Google Scholar
  9. Davis, J. R. (1995). Interdisciplinary courses and team teaching. Phoenix, AZ: American Council on Education and the Oryx Press.Google Scholar
  10. De Costa, E. M. (1986). Metacognition and higher order thinking: An interdisciplinary approach to critical thinking in the humanities. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the International Society for Individualized Instruction, USA, 15, 2-15.Google Scholar
  11. Dorsey, D. W., Campbell, G. E., Foster L. L., & Miles, D. E. (1999). Assessing knowledge structures: relations with experience and posttraining performance. Human Performance, 12, 31-57.Google Scholar
  12. Dressel, P. L. (1958). The meaning and significance of integration. In N. B. Henry, (Ed.), The integration of educational experiences (pp. 3-25). Chicago, IL: The National Society for the Study of Education.Google Scholar
  13. Entwistle, N., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
  14. Field, M., Lee, R., & Field, M. L. (1994). Assessing interdisciplinary learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 58, 69-84.Google Scholar
  15. Goldsmith, T., & Kraiger, K. (1996). Applications of structural knowledge assessment to training evaluation. In J. K. Ford, S. Kozlowski, K. Kraiger, E. Salas, & M. Teachout (Eds.), Improving training effectiveness in work organizations (pp. 73-97). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  16. Goldsmith, T. E., & Johnson, P. J. (1990). A structural assessment of classroom learning. In R. W. Schvaneveldt (Ed.), Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization (pp. 241-254). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  17. Gourgey, A. F. (1998). Metacognition in basic skills instruction. Instructional Science, 26, 81-96.Google Scholar
  18. Hacker, D. J. (1998). Definitions and empirical foundations. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 1-23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  19. Humphreys, A. H., Post, T. R., & Ellis, A. K. (1981). Interdisciplinary methods: A thematic approach. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear.Google Scholar
  20. Jacobs, H. H. (1989). The growing need for interdisciplinary curriculum content. In H. H. Jacobs (Ed.), Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation (pp. 1-11). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  21. Kelder, R. (1992). Epistemology and determining critical thinking skills in the disciplines. Montclair, NJ: Annual Conference of the Institute for Critical Thinking (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 305553).Google Scholar
  22. Kitchener, K. S., & King, P. M. (1990). The reflective judgment model: Ten years of research. In M. L. Commons, C. Armon, L. Kohlberg, F. A. Richards, T. A. Grotzer, & J. D. Sinnott, (Eds.), Adult development: Vol. 2 Models and methods in the study of adolescent and adult thought (pp. 63-78). New York: Prager.Google Scholar
  23. Klassen, P. (1983–1984). Changes in personal orientation and critical thinking among adults returning to school through weekend college: An alternative evaluation. Innovative Higher Education, 8, 55-67.Google Scholar
  24. Kuhn, D. (1992). Thinking as argument. Harvard Education Review, 62, 155-178.Google Scholar
  25. Lake, K. (1994). Integrated curriculum. In School Improvement Research Series, (Close-Up 16). Retrieved from http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/8/c016.htmlGoogle Scholar
  26. Lea, M. R., & Street, B. V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23, 157-172.Google Scholar
  27. Livengood, J. M. (1992). Students' motivational goals and beliefs about effort and ability as they relate to college academic success. Research in Higher Education, 33, 247-261.Google Scholar
  28. Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In B. F. Jones, J. L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 15-51). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  29. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  30. Perry, W. G., Jr. (1968). Patterns of development in thought and values of students in a liberal arts college: A validation of a scheme. Cambridge, MA: Bureau of Study Counsel, Harvard University (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 024315).Google Scholar
  31. Romainville, M. (1994). Awareness of cognitive strategies: The relationship between university students' metacognition and their performance. Studies in Higher Education, 19, 359-366.Google Scholar
  32. Rowntree, D. (1982). A dictionary of education. Totowa, NJ: Barnes & Noble Books.Google Scholar
  33. Ryan, M. P. (1984). Monitoring text comprehension: individual differences in epistemological standards. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 248-258.Google Scholar
  34. Schommer, M. (1994). Synthesizing epistemological belief research: tentative understandings and provocative confusions. Educational Psychology Review, 6, 293-319.Google Scholar
  35. Shafritz, J. M., Koeppe, R. T., & Soper, E. W. (1988). Facts on file dictionary of education. New York: Facts on File.Google Scholar
  36. Wineburg, S. S. (1991). On the reading of historical texts: Notes on the breach between school and academy. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 495-519.Google Scholar
  37. Wyman, B. G., & Randel, J. M. (1998). The relation of knowledge organization to performance of a complex cognitive task. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12, 251-264.Google Scholar
  38. Zhang, Z., & Richarde, R. S. (1999). Intellectual and metacognitive development of male college students: A repeated measure approach. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 721-738.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lana Ivanitskaya
    • 1
  • Deborah Clark
    • 2
  • George Montgomery
    • 3
  • Ronald Primeau
    • 4
  1. 1.College of Extended LearningCentral Michigan UniversityUSA
  2. 2.College of Extended LearningCentral Michigan UniversityUSA
  3. 3.Central Michigan UniversityUSA
  4. 4.Central Michigan UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations