Reflection on Fall 1999 Course Outcomes
Student concepts of interdisciplinarity and interdisciplinary classes (question 1)
Difficulties with defining "interdisciplinary"
| Interdisciplinarity and global
perspective
Interdisciplinarity and breadth of perspective |
interdisciplinarity and open-endedness
One of my main interests was to determine to what extent student understood the concept of interdisciplinarity. The first question of the survey asked students to define what an interdisciplinary class is (expecting them to use their experience in this class as a basis) or what they thought it should be.
Only nine of the thirty one student respondents clearly understood the concept of an interdisciplinary course or inquiry as involving the integration of several different disciplinary perspectives/methodologies:
*The word interdisciplinary means taking many courses and teaching them together. Like teaching art and religion together. I think that that should how they are taught. (Student 4, sophomore, nursing)
*I think interdisciplinary means having two or more different academics and artistic disciplines. I think an interdisciplinary class should be about teaching of one's self and also of different aspects of some other discipline. (Student 5, sophomore, nursing)
*To me the word "interdisciplinary" means involving two or more disciplines,or in this case it means involving two branches of learning... The interdisciplinary class differs from other classes in that it focus on two topics of learning instead of one. If a person is in Biology they are just learning about Biology. (Student 8, freshman, undecided major) This student's work often reflected awareness of multiple disciplinary resources, such as their performance on exam I, where the student made use of numerology, architecture, color theory, and other resources to discuss functionalism in Islamic mosques.
*"Interdisciplinary" is a word made up of the prefix "inter" and the root word "discipline". "Inter" means between, like interleague play is a game between the Amerian and National Leauges. Discipline is a field in whatever art or study you are discussing. Different artists subscribe to different disciplines and that's part of the way which we can indentify them. So interdisciplinary means between or concerning different disciplines. Therefore, an interdisciplinary class should be a class which you learn about many different disciplines within a certain subject. (Student 24, sophomore, Mass Communications) while this student's final exam did not engage some of the more abstract issues and also contained several factual errors, it does show some awareness of different disciplinary resources used in the class.
*Interdisciplinary refers to a pulling together or a synthesis of all the disciplines of study.... (student 25, junior, music ed.) This student's final exam was a generally good exam, though not one of the more innovative in choice and breadth of resources. It did demonstrate awareness of diverse disciplinary resources as well as the ability to integrate various schools of thought in response to the exam question.
*Interdisciplinary" means that the course integrates a number of various disciplines in order to provide the student with a better overall, well-rounded perspective and learning experience than typical, basic courses offer. (Student 28, freshman, marketing) This student's self-portrait online interview, completed at the end of the semester, shows an attempt to integrate several disciplinary perspectives on the self.
* Interdisciplinary means studying a variety of subjects or a broad look at a single idea from many different viewpoints. (Student 11, sophomore, Business Information Systems) This student's final exam showed an awareness of different disciplinary perspectives, including architecture, Chinese scrolls, sculpture, literature, and religion, and an attempt to integrate them in response to the course theme, "What is art?".
*Interdisciplinary means that multiple disciplines are used to teach an idea...(student 32, sophomore, undecided major)
On the one hand, the relative clarity with which these students answered this question (in comparison to other students) suggests that the course successfully developed these students' awareness of the methods of interdisciplinarians. This impression is further confirmed by samples of these students' work. The work of student 8 (freshman, undecided major), for example, demonstrated ability to make use of multiple disciplinary resources in a cross-disciplinary context already on the first exam; here the student made use of history, architecture, Jungian shape theory, and other resources to discuss functionalism in the Islamic mosque. By the time of the final exam, several of these students, including student 8, had learned to integrate material from diverse disciplines in a discussion of "What is art?". Student 8 also made gains in significant gains between her pre- and post-test scores on domain 1of the MER, progressing from a 2.3 to a 3.1. This student's domain 1 scores, which measure whether alternatives exist or whether there is a right choice, equal choice, or better or worse choices, showed a transition from a postition 2 on the pre-test to a position 3 on the post-test. Position 2 reflects a dualistic attitude, while position 3 reflects the acceptance of uncertainty and reliance on method as a way of reaching the proper outcome.
Student 24 (sophomore, Mass Communications), for example, clearly made use on the final exam of diverse disciplinary resources, such as art, architecture, and music, in an integrative fashion, and the student's self-portrait online interview also made reference to multiple disciplinary perspectives. Student 11 (sophomore, Business Information Systems) integrated the disciplinary resources of religion, art history, architecture, and literature on the final exam. Student 28 ( freshman, marketing), in the self-portrait online interview completed at the end of the semester, showed an attempt to reflect on and to integrate several disciplinary perspectives on the self. Student 28 also made gains in significant gains between her pre- and post-test scores on domain 1of the MER, progressing from a 3.3 to a 5.1. Position 3 reflects the acceptance of uncertainty and reliance on method as a way of reaching the proper outcome, while position 5 reflects a mature thinker who evaluates all evidence, including that from "authoriities" according to their own criteria.
Student 11 also made significant gains from the pre- to the post-test of the MER on domain 1 (3.1 to a 5.1), on domain 3, which relates to the what the student does with information and the responsibility of the instructor (2.3 to 3.1), and on domain 6, which relates to the nature of knowledge and how one evaluates it (3.3 to 4.1). No MER information is available for student 5, and student 4 showed no significant growth. Interestingly, of the 25 students who completed both a pre- and a post-test MER, 16 of them made significant gains on domain 1 of the MER, moving from one position to the next highest. In fact, the mean increase of the students whose domain scores improved on the post-test was startling: 1.13, or an increase from position 2 (high range) to position 3 (high range), which is a significant increase for a four month period.
The responses of these students to the survey question in the context of their course work over the term demonstrates that the course successfully developed their awareness of interdisciplinarity as a method and their ability and/or willingness to see the viability of various alternatives. Although their course work is of varying quality, it demonstrates a basic ability to recognize diverse disciplinary resources and to bring them to bear on a selected topic or issue. The data above would suggest that the course was very successful in cultivating an important aspect of all interdisciplinary courses -- the realization that there are various responses to the same question based on one's perspective and there are a variety of means by which to weigh the evidence.
These students all scored in the low range on the JPI in innovation, organization, analytical, willingness to accept risk (with one exception), and low to very low on complexity. On domain 5 of the MER, the mean score of these students on the pre-tests was in the middle range of position 2. Domain 5 relates to how students obtain information and how they think it should be evaluated, and students who score in position 2 tend to be dualistic in their thinking. They see the instructor as the authority who knows the right answer and the students' task as acquiring the correct answers. According to these students' JPI profiles and their MER scores, the complexity of interdisciplinary thinking would not be native to their personality traits, learning preferences, or level of cognitive development; nevertheless, in several cases, these students managed to do very well on assignments which required integration of diverse resources.
However, the JPI and MER scores may also be interpreted in another way, especially in light of these students' performance on exams and other course work. The information on these particular students' JPIs and MERs suggests that these responses may, in fact, be classic regurgitated answers. While these survey responses do indicate at least a rudimentary understanding of interdisciplinarity, they are, in fact, simple textbook responses. Although Student 8 performed very well on the first exam, this student's exam for the most part reflects mastery of the information given in the lecture and the online text. In other words, Student 8 had learned to mimic the instructor's approach and to explain it thoroughly in her own textbook-style response. This sort of learning was common in the early phases of the course and was largely the result of the course design and that of the examinations. Exam I, for example, required mastery of individual modules within the elements of art of functionalism units. As seen in the course enactment section, each module involved the integration of diverse disciplinary resources according to different models.
Students were not asked in the early phases of the course, however, to integrate multiple units in their responses to exams, and I evaluated essays on the basis of how thoroughly students had mastered the materials and how well they integrated them . The final exams of these students were more revealing in terms of progress, as they not only required integration of multiple aesthetic schools of interpretation and multiple disciplinary resources but also allowed for complete freedom of choice in terms of what materials to integrate and what one's ultimate response to the "What is Art?" question would be; although I do think the first midterm exams mentioned above reflect ability to engage in a level of complex analysis and integration beyond what their JPIs and MERs might indicate possible at their stage of development, these students do not, as a whole, represent the most noteworthy work accomplished in the class. Again, their success or lack thereof on early course work tended to revolve around their demonstration of mastery of materials presented. They had learned, as their MERs indicate, how to get the information and present it in the way they deemed appropriate for evaluation in the course.
It was still disturbing that more students could not answer this question as directly as did these students, and this raised some questions for me about the interdisciplinary approach of the class which I address in the concluding section of this narrative. The lack of more widespread ability to respond to this question may not, however, necessarily indicate a "defect" in the course design so much as the fact that other students tended to respond to those aspects of the course that were in conflict with their basic personality traits and learning preferences. The responses made by other students tended to be strongly linked to their personality traits as indicated through the JPI. It may be, therefore, that some of the other responses discussed below are more enlightening in terms of the aspects of the course that had the strongest impact on students and on the learning that occurred.
Several other students understood "interdisciplinarity" as developing breadth of perspective, broadening horizons, and encouraging one to go "beyond the norm":
*The interdisiplinary classes are designed to provide a wide base of knowledge and aid in the development of a well rounded student. (Student 14, marketing, sophomore)
*I think that "interdisciplinary" deals with the disciplines of thought and creativity. I think that it means finding a more in depth understanding of the things around us and within us to find understanding in the things we do, the things we say, how we evolved to where we are, and the ways in which we act. I think that an interdisciplinary class is a way for us to broaden our perspectives and views and challenge us to think beyond the norm. It provokes thoughts and ideas and gives a deeper insight into themes that some instructors only brush the surface of. Interdisciplinary classes encourage you to dig deeper and find the true meanings of things and the inspiration behind the things you find.(Student 6, sophomore, computer science).
Student 6 was one of the weaker students in the course. This student did, fact, make an effort on the final exam to integrate various resources and aesthetic perspectives on a discussion of "What is art?". On some levels at least, her behavior correlated with her self-reported perception. Student 6 scored in the very low range on the JPI on the breadth of interest, tolerance of diverse perspectives, complexity, innovation, and willingness to accept risk scales. Clearly, what struck this student the most about the class was that the course materials represented modes of thought that were often in conflict with her personality traits. For example, the global nature of the course would clearly clash with the personality traits of a student who scored in the very low range on the JPI in tolerance of diverse perspectives and also complexity.
Student 6's MER scores also show some significant cognitive transitions. This student's domain 1 scores, which measure whether alternatives exist or whether there is a right choice, equal choice, or better or worse choices, showed a transition from a postition 2 on the pre-test to a position 3 on the post-test. Position 2 relfects a dualistic attitude, while position 3 reflects the acceptance of uncertainty. This student's domain 2 score also increased from a 3.1. to a 3.5. This domain measure student attitudes about the role of the learner; in this case, this student progressed from a desire to see "facts linked to ideas" to preferring learning settings where the student "becomes involved through opinions and self-expression." Similarly, this student's domain 4 score, which measures the learner's ideas about participation, also increased from a 3.4 to a 4.1. In essence, this reflects an increasing willingness to regard everyone's opinions as valid and to believe one's peer's can help in the learning process. Her response to the survey, completed at the end of the semester, represents the areas in which she showed growth during the course.
Student 14 produced an exemplary final exam, which was noteworthy for the wide array of disciplinary and cultural resources discussed. The essay included reference to Yoruba color chromatics, Spanish reactions in art to the French Revolution, Michelangelo's Neoplatonism, Shinto, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, and the Jungian theory of the self. This student did not complete a JPI, but their score on the MER domain 1, which measures whether alternatives exist or whether there is a right choice, equal choice, or better or worse choices, showed a transition from a 3.1 to a 5.1. In position 3, choices are made with regard to the future, but authorities still function as measures of truth. In position 5.1, the student begins to judge the authorities by his or her own criteria. Similarly, this student also made gains in domain 3, where his scores increased from a 3.1 on the pre-test to a 3.7 on the post-test, representing a shift from seeing the instructor as there to give answers to being there to help the student learn processes by which to discover answers. On domain 6, this student's score increased from a 2.3 to a 3.1, reflecting a change in belief that al knowledge is known to a belief that some knowledge is as yet unknown. Differences of explainations are due to differences of opinion. This student's final exam reflected his belief that he had gained a wide base of knowledge in the course, but also his increased ability to recognize diversity of opinion and to judge them according to his own criteria.
These students' remarks and course work suggest that this course challenged them to progress beyond their typical patterns of thought as reflected by the JPI scores or their previous patterns of thought, as reflected by the MER pre-test scores.
Student perceptions of interdisciplinarity as tied to the course's global perspective
Other students remarked on the differences between their interdisciplinary courses and their more traditional disciplinary classes (responses to questions 1 and 2). One student stated that an interdisciplinary course could be defined as "out of the ordinary or out of the realm of regular classes."
In this case, as in many others, what the student perceived as "out of the ordinary" was the global perspective of the course, and took that to be a defining characteristic of interdisciplinary classes in general. In other words, their responses suggest that they noticed the diversity of cultural approaches to issues more than the diversity of disciplinary approaches.
This again raises some interesting questions about the interdisciplinary approach itself in the course, which are addressed later in this narrative. Nevertheless, as one clear aim of the course was to expose students to diverse cultural interpretations of the same issue, the course can be seen as successful from that point of view. Further, this aspect of the course was clearly successful at achieving one commonly stated goal of interdisciplinary work, which is to create "enlarged perspectives or horizons" (1). It also indicates success at supporting the institutional mission's emphasis on the development of global perspectives:
*An interdisciplinary class is one that isn't like any old math or science class. It takes you to new places and explores other cultures and ideas that you would have never thought of. The word itself can mean out of the ordinary or out of the realm of regular classes. I have learned so much from the IDST classes that I have taken. It has expanded my knowledge about life, my way of thinking, and also my view and acceptance of other cultures. (Student 20, freshman, Health Education)
*Interdisciplinary means the inner difference between different cultures and society. .. Also the study of the numerous diverse cultures should be compared and contrasted to show the different aspects of each culture. (Student 1, sophomore, Accounting)
*Interesting, it should teach a student about different cultures. (Student 7, sophomore, undecided major)
*An interdisciplinary class should expand your knowledge about different cultures.(Student 10; response to question 1, sophomore, Marketing)
These students all scored in the low to very low range on the JPI in preference for analytical thinking, tolerance of diverse perspectives, complexity, and extremely low on breadth of interest. These results again suggest that the aspects of the course that stood out the most for these students were often those that were in conflict with basic personality traits or learning preferences. These students also scored in the very high range on social skills and willingness to accept risk, while scoring in the low range on acceptance of traditional values (see their scores through the link above). This particular combination of personality traits seems to have created more receptivity to a global approach which was also reflected in student work. Student 20 (freshman, Health Education), for example, was the only student who wrote about African culture in her discussion of functionalism on the final exam; she also made use of Asian materials. Her reported newfound interest and willingness to explore other cultures was definitely corroborated by her actual work on the final. This student also made strong gains in every area but domain 2 on the MER. Similarly, student 10 also showed strong gains on the MER in every area but in domain 2.
Student Remarks on the "Open-Ended Nature" of an Interdisciplinary Course
Several students saw the most important characteristic of an interdisciplinary course as being the open-ended nature of the course. Many stated that this course presented greater opportunities to express their opinions and explore possibilities than in traditional disciplinary courses, as it did not present a "right or wrong answer" on issues:
*Interdisciplinary means the training to use your own thoughts and emotions to generate an answer to a problem that doesn't necessarily use the more structured elements of the other disciplines. An interdisciplinary class should be a class of free thinking and expression. The student should feel free to express themselves in any fashion they see fit with the exception of a way that would offend another.That is the only limit on this issue. ... The Interdisciplinary class allowed for self thought and expression. The traditional class is more of a structured class that has a rigid regement of responses that have a definite right and wrong answer. The Fine and Applied Arts class allowed the student the ability of free thought and expression which in today's world is stiffled many times due to the nature of the world we have created. (Student 18, response to questions 1 and 2, (student 18, sophomore, nontraditional student, Criminal Justice)
*Interdisciplinary means getting to know yourself both inside and outside. It means that you are capable of making your own choices and decisions despite what everyone else thinks because everyone has their own decisions. It helps you to explore your own personal thoughts and feelings about life as a whole. An interdisciplinary class shouldn't teach you to think, but how to think. It should help you to further understand yourself as a person. It should teach you how your mind and thoughts can form opions all on your own. (Student 21, sophomore, Nursing)
*An interdisciplinary class teaches people more how to think for themselves rather than just lecturing information at the student. Interdisciplinary classes allow more freedom for discussion. These classes also show the student that nothing in the world is separated and neatly categorized like traditional classes are. It is a more practical and realistic form of education. (Student 32, sophomore, undecided)
*Interdisciplinary is teaching yourself and making sure that you achieve what you want to.(Student 26, sophomore, undecided)
These students scored in the high range on the JPI on preference for dependability, which indicates that they were not particularly flexible, preferred predictability, were very methodical and resisted change. Their scores on 3 of the six domains of the MER were in position 2; these included domains 1, 2, and 4 (whether alternatives exist, the role of the learner, and the nature and purpose of participation). At this stage in these domains, students would look for right and wrong answers (dualism), expect performance by recitation or rote, and expect to ask questions and get a response from the teacher). These students scored in the low to mid range of position 3 on the other domains, which include 3, 5, and 6 (what the student does with information, the basis for evaluation and who is competent to evaluate, and the nature of knowledge). Scores in this range would indicate that students were beginning to accept the fact that some knowledge is unknown, but as yet unable to accept uncertainity as a major feature of knowledge. Students in these stages are still looking to instructors to provide authority.
Again, their remarks indicate that what stood out most about the course for them were the aspects that conflicted with their learning preferences/personality traits as indicated by the JPI and the MER. These students, however, also scored in the very high range on the JPI on preference for analytical contexts, tolerance of diverse opinions, and breadth of interests. Their willingness to tolerate diversity, their preference for analytical contexts, and their natural breadth of interest along with the course content may have prompted them to be more willing to tolerate the open-endedness of the course. The performance of these students was, on the whole, for superior to that of other students in the class. Students 18 and 21, in particular, excelled throughout the course as evident on student 21's performance on exam I, both students' final exams (student 18; student 21) and their self-portraits (student 18; student 21).
Notes
1. William H. Newell, "Interdisciplinary Curriculum Development," in Issues in Integrative Studies no. 8 (1990) 69-70.
To further explore my reflection on fall 1999 course outcomes, please continue on to
Student
perceptions of the role of pedagogical techniques
Student
comments on the impact of this course on other areas of their studies
or lives
IDST 2310 Conclusions | Data at a Glance | Project Overview | About the Author
Explorations in Interdisciplinary Teaching and Learning Home Page