Interdisciplinary Communication (original) (raw)
Related papers
Interdisciplinary Communication Nagib Callaos
2011
Communication is fundamental in scientific practice and an integral part of academic work. The practice of communication cannot be neglected by those who are trying to advance scientific research. Effective means should continuously be identified in order to open channels of communication within and among disciplines, among scientists and between scientists and the general public. 1 The increasing importance of interdisciplinary communication has been pointed out by an increasing number of researchers and scholars, as well as in conferences and roundtables on the subject. Some authors even estimate that “interdisciplinary study represents the future of the university.” 2 Since interdisciplinary study is “the most underthought critical, pedagogical and institutional concept in modern academy” 3 it is important to think and reflect, and even do some research, on this concept or notion. Research and practice based reflections with regards to this issue are important especially because ...
Case Study in Interdisciplinary Scientific Communication: A Decade of the INDECS Journal
Business Systems Research Journal, 2017
Background: Interdisciplinary scientific areas regularly develop unique methodologies, yet utilise the conventional communication modes to disseminate results of their researches. Objectives: This paper analyses whether a novel, interdisciplinary communication mode can be found in a gradually developing interdisciplinary journal. Methods/Approach: The content of the journal was categorised based on the characteristics attributed to the published papers. Statistical tests were performed to check for the overlapping categories. Results: A number of indicators, related to papers or to their authors, are introduced and quantified. Conclusions: Methodology utilised and data collected serve, on the one hand, as a referent set for treating the content of other interdisciplinary or disciplinary scientific journals, and, on the other hand, as a set for comparison and extraction of universalities or specificities of the journals. Fluctuations accompanying a gradual rise of the considered journal content prevent a definite answer to the question whether there are some emerging interdisciplinary communication novelties.
Interdisciplinariety: A perspective from the dynamics of scientific production and communication
In his six-volume “The University, studies on its origins, dynamics and trends” [“La Universidad estudios sobre sus orígenes Dinámicas y tendencias”], Borrero (2008) states that interdisciplinariety can be understood in two semantic sets. On the one hand, it refers to a set of specific attributes that permit an account of the relationships between sciences and disciplines; on the other, it is the relationship between disciplines and the distinction with everything that is mono-disciplinar (Borrero, 2008). As such, the multidisciplinary (juxtaposition of disciplines) implies a set of assertions of epistemological plurality, discontinuity, relative autonomy, theoretical integration, epistemological affinities, and in the end it is an imperative “stemming from the evolution of science itself” (Borrero, 2008, p. 267). Recently, Uribe-Mallarino (2012) in her book entitled “Interdisciplinariety in today’s university: reflections and case studies” [“La Interdisciplinariedad en la Universidad Contemporánea: reflexiones y estudios de caso”], affirms that interdisciplinariety is internationally defined around concepts such as collaboration, hybridation, complexity, integration, transversality, and problem solving.
n his six-volume “The University, studies on its origins, dynamics and trends” [“La Universidad estudios sobre sus orígenes Dinámicas y tendencias”], Borrero (2008) states that interdisciplinariety can be understood in two semantic sets. On the one hand, it refers to a set of specific attributes that permit an account of the relationships between sciences and disciplines; on the other, it is the relationship between disciplines and the distinction with everything that is mono-disciplinar (Borrero, 2008). As such, the multidisciplinary (juxtaposition of disciplines) implies a set of assertions of epistemological plurality, discontinuity, relative autonomy, theoretical integration, epistemological affinities, and in the end it is an imperative “stemming from the evolution of science itself” (Borrero, 2008, p. 267). Recently, Uribe-Mallarino (2012) in her book entitled “Interdisciplinariety in today’s university: reflections and case studies” [“La Interdisciplinariedad en la Universidad Contemporánea: reflexiones y estudios de caso”], affirms that interdisciplinariety is internationally defined around concepts such as collaboration, hybridation, complexity, integration, transversality, and problem solving.
Science communication-an emerging discipline
Several publications have sought to define the field of science communication and review current issues and recent research. But the status of science communication is uncertain in disciplinary terms. This commentary considers two dimensions of the status of discipline as they apply to science communication -the clarity with which the field is defined and the level of development of theories to guide formal studies. It argues that further theoretical development is needed to support science communication's full emergence as a discipline.
Students need to think and work across disciplinary boundaries in the twenty-first century. However, it is unclear what interdisciplinary thinking means and how to analyze interdisciplinary interactions in teamwork. In this paper, drawing on multiple theoretical perspectives and empirical analysis of discourse contents, we formulate a theoretical framework that helps analyze interdisciplinary reasoning and communication (IRC) processes in interdisciplinary collaboration. Specifically, we propose four interrelated IRC processes—integration, translation, transfer, and transformation, and develop a corresponding analytic framework. We apply the framework to analyze two meetings of a project that aims to develop interdisciplinary science assessment items. The results illustrate that the framework can help interpret the interdisciplinary meeting dynamics and patterns. Our coding process and results also suggest that these IRC processes can be further examined in terms of interconnected sub-processes. We also discuss the implications of using the framework in conceptualizing, practicing, and researching interdisciplinary learning and teaching in science education.
JCOM - Journal of Science Communication, 2024
Science communication education is fundamentally concerned with relations between and within communities, cultures and institutions. Through exploration of these relations, it develops understanding of how knowledge is produced, shared and validated. Science communication operates at the boundaries and intersections of disciplines in its professional practice and it analyses them in research and education. At its interdisciplinary best, science communication is a continuing exercise in reflexivity on science and its place in wider intellectual and public culture. From this premise, this essay reflects on the promise of bringing perspectives from humanities, social sciences and natural sciences to bear on science, the pleasures of science communication as "joyously interdisciplinary", but also on the problems in fulfilling the promise and realising the pleasures. It closes with a proposition for giving interdisciplinarity a more prominent place in science communication education.
Science and Interdisciplinarity: A Treatise on the Philosophy of Interdisciplinary Research
Volume 6, Issue 1, May, 2022
There is an increasing drive towards interdisciplinarity in all fields of knowledge. The general schema is a necessary and ultimately useful one in generating new ideas and "big picture" conceptualizations of knowledge, yet an impediment to its large-scale adaptation by universities and the Academy is sometimes found within interdisciplinarians themselves. In this manuscript I outline several problems at the core of the "discipline of interdisciplinarity," many of the questionable arguments used by some proponents of the field to justify their identification and determination of what is interdisciplinary, outline numerous examples of historical interdisciplinarity, and finally propose a New Argument that seeks to encompass all fields of researchdisciplinary or otherwisein a generalized fashion. The New Argument summarized is that if human endeavours are analysable into disciplines, then so too are disciplines into their fundamental components. Observing the parallels between disciplines, they are: 1) the subject, 2) the measure, 3) the method, and 4) the cause. The work draws heavily upon Aristotle, and hopes to clarify the muddied waters of interdisciplinarian debate.
IRPN: Other Environment for Innovation (Topic), 2018
The essay, written on the occasion of Tilburg University's Dies Natalis 2018, explores the added value of interdisciplinary collaboration for science, university, and society. It argues that interdisciplinary collaboration is a prerequisite for science to contribute to major problems – wicked problems – and thus generate impact of knowledge. Starting from that premise, the essay looks first at what exactly is interdisciplinarity (how does it distinguish itself from other forms of collaboration that transcend disciplines?) and how it has evolved over time in the practice of science. It subsequently assesses whether there is a case for further strengthening and stimulating interdisciplinarity in research and education at (European) universities, and if so, how this could be organized. It closes with the observation that the design, organization, and outcome of interdisciplinary research and education need time, and hence, formulates a request towards universities to give their res...
A strong tendency can be discerned in contemporary academia for interdisciplinary research. 1 This stems from the fact that specialization, understood as being hermetically sealed in one, narrow field-and, perhaps more importantly, being focused on a particularly detailed problem within it-not only limits the cognitive horizons of the researcher (an ageold phenomenon, described in detail by José Ortega y Gasset in The Revolt of the Masses) but also (if it becomes a widespread or universal tendency) the development of science itself. This is because, in addition to the specialists who confine themselves to narrow fields, science also needs researchers who traverse the borders and barriers of scientific disciplines, seeking connections between them and drawing inspiration from disciplines other than their "own". This is necessary for at least four reasons. First, in order to solve the "internal" research problems of individual disciplines, it is sometimes crucial to draw inspiration (whether concerning the research method itself or its substantive hypotheses) from other disciplines. Secondly, along with the development and progress of civilization, new challenges appear in the modern world that require the integration of efforts of representatives of various scientific disciplines (here it suffices to mention the problem of climate change, one which is being faced by meteorologists, physicists, chemists, biologists, oceanologists, and philosophers alike). Thirdly, there is a sense of nostalgia amongst many