Abstract
Tertiary institutions across Australia and internationally are increasingly moving toward implementing innovative frameworks for teaching and learning to facilitate cross-disciplinary, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary forms of education. Such programmes are characterized by learning and research that transgresses disciplinary boundaries, and supports collaborative research and practice to generate novel approaches to complex problems. In creating programmes that cross faculties, disciplines and epistemological perspectives, both challenges and opportunities undoubtedly arise. This chapter investigates the range of perceived and actual barriers to implementing interdisciplinary postgraduate programmes at an institutional level at the University of Technology Sydney. Over a 12-month research project, 25 interviews with faculty deans, senior executives, and teaching and learning and operations staff across the university were conducted, highlighting cultural, institutional, governance, planning and marketing issues that needed to be overcome for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary postgraduate programmes to be successful in the long term. We sought to ensure the validity of the research findings by holding a half-day workshop Validity of the research findings were sought through a half-day workshop with senior faculty and operations staff to collaboratively identify major barriers and mitigation strategies for the success of interdisciplinary programmes in the future. This chapter, therefore, is not only an illustrative example of the challenges faced by programmes aiming to reform collaborative education; it also provides insight into the process of collaboratively developing recommendations for how new programmes might support cultural change, successful planning, governance and the operationalization of programmes that transgress disciplinary and faculty structures for the improvement of teaching and learning.
Keywords
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Augsburg, T. (2014). Becoming transdisciplinary: The emergence of the transdisciplinary individual. World Futures: The Journal of New Paradigm Research, 70(3–4), 233–247.
Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brew, A. (2012). Teaching and research: New relationships and their implications for inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 31(1), 101–114.
Derrick, E. G., Falk-Krzesinski, H. J., & Roberts, M. R. (Eds.). (2011). Facilitating interdisciplinary research and education: A practical guide. Workshop report from science on FIRE: Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research and Education, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Colorado.
Fam, D. M., Smith, T., & Cordell, D. (2017). Being a transdisciplinary researcher: Skills and dispositions fostering competence in transdisciplinary research and practice. In D. Fam, J. Palmer, C. Riedy, & C. Mitchell (Eds.), Transdisciplinary research and practice for sustainability outcomes (pp. 77–92). London/New York: Routledge.
Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T., & Maeroff, G. I. (1997). Scholarship assesses: Evaluation of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Golding, C. (2009). Integrating the disciplines: Successful interdisciplinary subjects. Report for The Centre for the Study of Higher Education, The University of Melbourne, Victoria.
Hart Research Associates. (2015). Falling short? College learning and career success: Selected findings from online surveys of employers and college students conducted on behalf of the Association of American Colleges and Universities. Report prepared for the Association of American Colleges and Universities, Washington, DC.
Hartesveldt, C. V., & Giordan, J. (2008). Impact of transformative interdisciplinary research and graduate education on academic institutions. Workshop Report, National Science Foundation.
Henry, S. (2005). Disciplinary hegemony meets interdisciplinary ascendancy: Can interdisciplinary/integrative studies survive, and if so, how? Issues in Integrative Studies, 12, 1–37.
Holley, K. A. (2009). Special issue: Understanding interdisciplinary challenges and opportunities in higher education. ASHE Higher Education Report, 35(2), 1–131.
Jenkins, A., Healey, M., & Zetter, R. (2008). Linking teaching and research in disciplines and departments. Available at: http://www.edshare.soton.ac.uk/349/1/LinkingTeachingAndResearch_April07.pdf. Accessed 17 June 2017.
Jiang, F., & Roberts, P. (2011). An investigation of the impact of research-led education on student learning. Technical report. Available at: http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1161&context=jutlp. Accessed 17 June 2017.
Klein, J. T. (2010). Creating interdisciplinary campus cultures: A model for strength and sustainability. San Francisco: Wiley.
Klein, J. T. (2017). Transdisciplinarity and sustainability: Patterns of definition. In D. Fam, J. Palmer, C. Riedy, & C. Mitchell (Eds.), Transdisciplinary research and practice for sustainability outcomes. London/New York: Routledge.
Klein, J. T. (2018). Learning and transdisciplinary collaboration: A conceptual vocabulary. In D. Fam, L. Neuhauser, & P. Gibbs (Eds.), The art of collaborative research and collective learning: Transdisciplinary research, practice and education. Dordrecht: Springer.
Klein, J., & Newell, W. (1998). Advancing interdisciplinary studies. In W. Newell (Ed.), Interdisciplinarity: Essays from the literature. New York: College Board.
Longino, H. E. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Miller, T. R., Baird, T. D., Littlefield, C. M., Kofinas, G., Chapin, F., III, & Redman, C. L. (2008). Epistemological pluralism: Reorganizing interdisciplinary research. Ecology and Society, 13(2), 46.
Miller, A., Sharp, J., & Strong, J. (2012). What is research-led teaching? Multi-disciplinary perspectives REST/GuildHE. Available at: http://collections.crest.ac.uk/5215/. Accessed 17 June 2017.
Minnich, E. (1995). Liberal learning and the arts of connection for the new academy. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Mulgan, G., Townsley, O., & Price, A. (2016). The challenge-driven university: How real-life problems can fuel learning. Draft report, National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts (UK) (NESTA).
Schneider, C. G., & Shoenberg, R. (1998). Contemporary understandings of liberal education. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Tress, B., Tress, G., & Fry, G. (2005). Defining concepts and the process of knowledge production in integrative research. In B. Tress, G. Tress, G. Fry, & P. Opdam (Eds.), From landscape research to landscape planning: Aspects of integration, education and application. Dordrecht: Wageningen University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fam, D., Leimbach, T., Kelly, S., Hitchens, L., Callen, M. (2018). Meta-considerations for Planning, Introducing and Standardising Inter and Transdisciplinary Learning in Higher Degree Institutions. In: Fam, D., Neuhauser, L., Gibbs, P. (eds) Transdisciplinary Theory, Practice and Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93743-4_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93743-4_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-93742-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-93743-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)