Abstract
This chapter analyses findings from our research interviews with physicists and historians that pertain to interdisciplinarity. In epistemic terms they see interdisciplinary directions as something that develops organically both within disciplines and between them. They believe that strong interdisciplinary work requires strong disciplinary ‘insider’ identity, and that this has implications for the balance of specialist and interdisciplinary subjects and majors at undergraduate level. Both historians and physicists expressed resentment of ‘top-down’ institutional and funding incentives to do interdisciplinary research, but they were also critical of disincentives to do such work as a result of the mechanisms used by national competitive funding schemes and in research assessments. Physicists mainly talked about interdisciplinary research and teaching as an outcome of the growth of knowledge in science. Historians mainly saw the recent developments as an outcome of university efforts to save money. Historians were less uniform than physicists in the ways they spoke about interdisciplinary developments, including whether publication achievement was reduced or enhanced by engaging in such work.
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 subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
This issue of the FOR codes has been analysed in more detail in Woelert and Millar (2013).
References
Abbott, A. (2001). Chaos of disciplines. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Bammer, G. (2012). Strengthening interdisciplinary research: What it is, what it does, how it does it, and how it is supported. Canberra: Australian Council of Learned Academies (ACOLA) Report. Retrieved from http://www.acola.org.au/PDF/Strengthening%20Interdisciplinary%20Research.pdf
Klein, J. T. (1996). Crossing boundaries, knowledge, disciplinarities, interdisciplinarities. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.
Klein, J. T. (2000). A conceptual vocabulary of interdisciplinary science. In P. Weingart & N. Stehr (Eds.), Practising interdisciplinarity (pp. 3–24). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Jacobs, J. A., & Frickel, S. (2009). Interdisciplinarity: A critical assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 43–65.
van Leeuwen, T., & Tijssen, R. (2000). Interdisciplinary dynamics of modern science: Analysis of cross-disciplinary citation flows. Research Evaluation, 9(3), 183–187.
Weingart, P. (2000). Interdisciplinarity: The paradoxical discourse. In P. Weingart & N. Stehr (Eds.), Practising interdisciplinarity (pp. 25–41). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Woelert, P., & Millar, V. (2013). The ‘paradox of interdisciplinarity’ in Australian research governance. Higher Education, 66(6), 755–767.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Yates, L., Woelert, P., Millar, V., O’Connor, K. (2017). Disciplines and Interdisciplinarity. In: Knowledge at the Crossroads?. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2081-0_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2081-0_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-2079-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-2081-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)