跨学科的建构与制定:文科与理科教育的扎根理论个案研究

IF 2 3区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Xin Ming , Miles MacLeod , Jan van der Veen
{"title":"跨学科的建构与制定:文科与理科教育的扎根理论个案研究","authors":"Xin Ming ,&nbsp;Miles MacLeod ,&nbsp;Jan van der Veen","doi":"10.1016/j.lcsi.2023.100716","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article explores how interdisciplinarity is constructed and enacted in a Liberal Arts and Sciences (LAS) educational environment, when self-tailored personal academic development is intertwined with collaborative group work involving various disciplinary input. A case study taking a grounded theory approach analyzed how interdisciplinarity emerged from collaborative groupwork dynamics in which students' academic identities manifest and interact. Academic identity in LAS contexts is complex: Individuals' disciplinary identities intersect with a generic program-bound identity shared by all students. Disciplinary identity was not only unique for each student, but also showed diverse configurations among the LAS population, as revealed in three disciplinary profiles: disciplinary specialists, topic experts, and identity explorers. Interdisciplinarity, accordingly, has different meanings and entails different journeys of academic growth. The interplay between and among the intersectional academic identities constitutes different groupwork dynamics and leads to different learning experiences. Comparing three patterns of groupwork experience—non-disciplinary, monodisciplinary and interdisciplinary—the article argues for two key concepts crucial for experiencing interdisciplinarity: disciplinary enablement and disciplinary transaction. To make sense of interdisciplinarity in LAS contexts, the article further looks into tensions perceived by students regarding specific groupwork as well as long-term academic development. The tensions reflect two dimensions of knowledge and knowledge work that both LAS students and LAS education in general need to reconcile, namely, specification and specialization versus generalization and integration.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46850,"journal":{"name":"Learning Culture and Social Interaction","volume":"40 ","pages":"Article 100716"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Construction and enactment of interdisciplinarity: A grounded theory case study in Liberal Arts and Sciences education\",\"authors\":\"Xin Ming ,&nbsp;Miles MacLeod ,&nbsp;Jan van der Veen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.lcsi.2023.100716\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This article explores how interdisciplinarity is constructed and enacted in a Liberal Arts and Sciences (LAS) educational environment, when self-tailored personal academic development is intertwined with collaborative group work involving various disciplinary input. A case study taking a grounded theory approach analyzed how interdisciplinarity emerged from collaborative groupwork dynamics in which students' academic identities manifest and interact. Academic identity in LAS contexts is complex: Individuals' disciplinary identities intersect with a generic program-bound identity shared by all students. Disciplinary identity was not only unique for each student, but also showed diverse configurations among the LAS population, as revealed in three disciplinary profiles: disciplinary specialists, topic experts, and identity explorers. Interdisciplinarity, accordingly, has different meanings and entails different journeys of academic growth. The interplay between and among the intersectional academic identities constitutes different groupwork dynamics and leads to different learning experiences. Comparing three patterns of groupwork experience—non-disciplinary, monodisciplinary and interdisciplinary—the article argues for two key concepts crucial for experiencing interdisciplinarity: disciplinary enablement and disciplinary transaction. To make sense of interdisciplinarity in LAS contexts, the article further looks into tensions perceived by students regarding specific groupwork as well as long-term academic development. The tensions reflect two dimensions of knowledge and knowledge work that both LAS students and LAS education in general need to reconcile, namely, specification and specialization versus generalization and integration.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46850,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Learning Culture and Social Interaction\",\"volume\":\"40 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100716\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Learning Culture and Social Interaction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210656123000326\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Culture and Social Interaction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210656123000326","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了在文科和理科(LAS)教育环境中,当个性化的个人学术发展与涉及各种学科投入的协作小组工作交织在一起时,跨学科是如何构建和实施的。一个案例研究采用扎根理论的方法分析了跨学科是如何从学生的学术身份表现和互动的协作小组动态中产生的。LAS背景下的学术身份是复杂的:个人的学科身份与所有学生共享的通用项目身份交叉。学科身份不仅对每个学生来说都是独特的,而且在LAS人群中也表现出不同的配置,如三种学科概况:学科专家、主题专家和身份探索者。因此,跨学科具有不同的含义,也需要不同的学术成长历程。交叉学术身份之间的相互作用构成了不同的群体工作动力,导致不同的学习体验。本文比较了非学科、单学科和跨学科的三种小组工作体验模式,提出了体验跨学科的两个关键概念:学科使能和学科交易。为了理解LAS背景下的跨学科性,本文进一步研究了学生在特定小组工作和长期学术发展方面所感受到的紧张关系。这种紧张关系反映了LAS学生和LAS教育总体上需要协调的知识和知识工作的两个维度,即规范和专业化与泛化和整合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Construction and enactment of interdisciplinarity: A grounded theory case study in Liberal Arts and Sciences education

This article explores how interdisciplinarity is constructed and enacted in a Liberal Arts and Sciences (LAS) educational environment, when self-tailored personal academic development is intertwined with collaborative group work involving various disciplinary input. A case study taking a grounded theory approach analyzed how interdisciplinarity emerged from collaborative groupwork dynamics in which students' academic identities manifest and interact. Academic identity in LAS contexts is complex: Individuals' disciplinary identities intersect with a generic program-bound identity shared by all students. Disciplinary identity was not only unique for each student, but also showed diverse configurations among the LAS population, as revealed in three disciplinary profiles: disciplinary specialists, topic experts, and identity explorers. Interdisciplinarity, accordingly, has different meanings and entails different journeys of academic growth. The interplay between and among the intersectional academic identities constitutes different groupwork dynamics and leads to different learning experiences. Comparing three patterns of groupwork experience—non-disciplinary, monodisciplinary and interdisciplinary—the article argues for two key concepts crucial for experiencing interdisciplinarity: disciplinary enablement and disciplinary transaction. To make sense of interdisciplinarity in LAS contexts, the article further looks into tensions perceived by students regarding specific groupwork as well as long-term academic development. The tensions reflect two dimensions of knowledge and knowledge work that both LAS students and LAS education in general need to reconcile, namely, specification and specialization versus generalization and integration.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Learning Culture and Social Interaction
Learning Culture and Social Interaction EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
10.50%
发文量
50
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信