Making Making InterdisciplinariInterdisciplinarity ty WorkWork

Stephanie PfirmanBarnard College, Columbia University

Director of Interdisciplinary InitiativesCo-PI NSF Columbia Earth Institute Advancing Women in the

Sciences President, Council of Environmental Deans and Directors

1

Chronicle 2005

OutlineOutline

Who is engaging in interdisciplinarity? How do people approach interdisciplinarity? What are the consequences of engaging in

interdisciplinarity? What can individuals do to overcome

interdisciplinary challenges? What can institutions do to build interdisciplinary

capacity?

2

WHO IS ENGAGING IN INTERDISCIPLINARITY?

3

Lifecycle/Lifecycle/Cohort % Cohort %

Time Spent Time Spent on on

InterdisciplinInterdisciplinary Research ary Research

4

Women 1.1x

Junior Women 1.4x

Jr Women not PE 1.7x

Evaluation Associates, 1999: Research Assessment in the

United Kingdom

Medical and Biological Sciences

Physical and Engineering Sciences

Social Sciences

Arts and Humanities

All

Disciplinary Disciplinary StereotypesStereotypes________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Quantitative2. Qualitative3. Concerned about

others4. Communal5. Tough6. Self-driven7. Independent8. Nice9. Assertive10. Welfare orientation11. Self-promoting12. Helpful13. Collaborative14. Careerist15. Risky science16. Mainstream science17. Consensus style18. Task oriented19. Socially sensitive20. Synthesis21. Quick to publish22. Productive 23. Multitasking24. Focused25. Competitive26. Societal good27. Friendly28. Democratic

leadership29. Hierarchical

leadership

5

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

InterdisciplinaryInterdisciplinaryStereotypesStereotypes

Characteristics of Disciplinary vs. Characteristics of Disciplinary vs.

Collaborative, Interdisciplinary Collaborative, Interdisciplinary Scientists …Scientists …Disciplinary Quantitative Tough Self-driven Independent Assertive Self-promoting, take credit for

successes Careerist Risky science within the

mainstream/consensus science Focused, task oriented Quick to publish, get ideas out Productive Competitive Command-and-control leadership

(e.g. lab hierarchy)

Collaborative, Interdisciplinary

Relational, qualitative Friendly, nice Concerned about others and their

welfare Helping Socially sensitive, listening Communal Less careerist Interdisciplinary science Multitasking Synthesis Not competitive Consensus oriented, democratic

leadership

6Which side looks like an easier tenure case?

InterdiscipliInterdisciplinary nary

researchers researchers do not tend do not tend

to specialize, to specialize, while while

disciplinary disciplinary researchers researchers

dodo

7

Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity

Alan L. Porter, Alex S. Cohen, David Roessner and Marty

Perreault, 2007, Scientometrics

Gardner’s Synthesizing Mind?

Evolution toward ID, or ID from outset?

“Knowing when and how to bring interdisciplinary work into one’s career is a question for many researchers.

Kinzig notes that many scientists feel strongly that students should become expert in one discipline before crossing boundaries.

But, she adds, “I think we have an increasing number of students who aren’t that interested in being disciplinary. I think if I had had to focus narrowly within a particular discipline, I would not have finished graduate school. I just would have gotten bored.”’

8NATURE|Vol 443|21 September 2006

ID TrainingID Training

9

Structuring Curricular Content / Career Trajectory

  Disciplinary Interdisciplinary Bloom's

Taxonomy?

  Funnel Fan Sandwich Buffet  

Introductory D or ID D ID IDKnowledge,

Comprehension

Intermediate D ID or D D IDApplication,

Analysis

Capstone D ID ID IDSynthesis, Evaluation

Pfirman, 2008

HOW DO PEOPLE HOW DO PEOPLE APPROACH APPROACH INTERDISCIPLINARITY?INTERDISCIPLINARITY?

10

ID Research, Teaching, ID Research, Teaching, AdministrationAdministration

11 Rhoten and Pfirman, 2007a,b

Cross-fertilization – adapting and using ideas, approaches and information from different fields and/or disciplines

Team-collaboration – collaborating in teams or networks that span different fields and/or disciplines

Field-creation – topics that sit at the intersection or edges of multiple fields and/or disciplines

Problem-orientation – problems that engage multiple stakeholders and missions outside of academe, for example that serve society

Intrapersonal: Cognitive Connections

Interpersonal: Collegial Connections

Inter-departmental:Cross-fieldConnections

Stakeholder:Community Connections

Cognitive Cognitive ConnectionsConnections

12Evaluation Associates, 1999

Women 1.3x

Collegial ConnectionsCollegial Connections

13 Evaluation Associates, 1999

Ways of working of researchers involved in ID research (%)

WHAT ARE THE WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCESCONSEQUENCES OF ENGAGING OF ENGAGING IN INTERDISCIPLINARITY?IN INTERDISCIPLINARITY?

14

Promise and Perils of Interdisciplinary Promise and Perils of Interdisciplinary ResearchResearch

Often Early Attraction …

But Later difficulties …

New area Can break new groundLess competitionLess urgency

Lack of recognition by established scholarsLack of funding opportunitiesLack of journalsLack of peer reviewersCareer trajectory not knownLong start up timeNo one to correct flaws

Social/Applied Connections

Appeals to social conscienceConnect with public good

Less prestigious research area

Complex questions

Holistic approach required

Less amenable to theory

Collaborative Build on strengths of othersUse people skills

Time to cultivate and maintainCritical literature in other fieldDependent on collaboratorIdea origin not clear

Between Depts/Centers

Freedom because outside of established hierarchy

No one has responsibility for you

Inter-institutional

Broadens network for letter writers

Requires travelLess visibility on home campus

Promise and Perils of Interdisciplinary Promise and Perils of Interdisciplinary Education and CommunityEducation and Community

Often Early Attraction … But Later difficulties …

Teaching Exciting subjectStudent interestCo-teachingField experiencesService learning

<= No textbook, resourcesLack of infrastructure to sustain “extra” duties (note Theater)

Campus Life Campus programmingCommunity connectionsBridge betw disciplines: search committees, presentationsBecome known on campus

Everyone wants a piece of you

Scholarly Participation

Field more open, can initiate programs

Few high level, prestigious committeesNot as many honors in interdisciplinary fields

Promotion and Tenure

Criteria often disadvantage interdisciplinary scholars

Pfirman, Martin et al., http://ncseonline.org/CEDD/cms.cfm?id=2042

17

““Are there impediments to interdisciplinary Are there impediments to interdisciplinary research at your current institution?research at your current institution?””

Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, 2004, Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, 2004, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public

Policy (COSEPUP) ConvocationPolicy (COSEPUP) Convocation

Small Differences in Small Differences in Promotional Steps Add Up Promotional Steps Add Up Over timeOver time

18

Diverse Academics Less Diverse Academics Less Productive than those who Productive than those who SpecializeSpecialize

19

Note: The diverse scholar has a specialization score of <.22 and the specialized scholar has specialization score of >.58, the 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively, of the distribution of specialization scores.

Leahey et al. 2008Gendered academic careers: Specializing

for success? Social Forces, 85, 3, 1273-1309

Women Specialize Less

20

2006, Gender & Society

ID Leads to Identity ID Leads to Identity IssuesIssuesThe Central Source of Faculty Identity is the The Central Source of Faculty Identity is the DisciplineDiscipline

21

“Each of us has had the experience of feeling as though we do not ‘really’ belong to the research team, or that, upon

returning to our scholarly ‘homes’ after a research meeting, we do not really belong there either.

Working at the boundaries of communities of practice, team members can feel uprooted, alien, frustrated. …

(Lingard et al., 2007).

… while their peers establish identity and status within the discipline, interdisciplinary scholars have to

“live without the comfort of expertise” (Lattuca, 2001)

Expertise and StatusExpertise and Status

Wittenbaum and Bowman, 2005

“Cognitively central” members expected to

hold higher-status position and dominate discussion more than “cognitively periphera

l” members

Communication of Communication of ““SharedShared”” vs. vs. ““UnsharedUnshared”” InformationInformation

23

Shared information

evaluated as more

important, relevant

Members value shared information

and those who contribute it

because that information can be verified as correct

Wittenbaum and Bowman, 2005

Communication of Communication of Unshared InformationUnshared Information Unshared information communicated by high-

status member is more likely to be repeated, remembered and shared than if communicated by low-status member Members judged by others as competent are afforded

opportunity and credibility necessary for emphasizing unshared information

Unshared information mentioned by low-status members is not remembered and repeated to the same extent: perhaps met with some skepticism and perhaps valued less

Wittenbaum and Bowman, 2005

Non-mainstream/

Inter-disciplinary

“Non-Mainstream” = Lack of ValueStudy of Faculty Worklife at the University of Wisconsin-MadisonStudy of Faculty Worklife at the University of Wisconsin-Madison

25Non-mainstream lack of value1.9x

Colleagues solicit my opinion about work Colleagues value my research

Faculty Perceptions of Colleagues’ Valuation of Research

Faculty Perception of Colleagues’ Valuation of Research by Gender and Department ChairStudy of Faculty Worklife at the University of Wisconsin-Madison

26http://wiseli.engr.wisc.edu/initiatives/survey/results/facultypre/profact/interact/summary.htmWomen

1.2x

Faculty Perception of Colleagues’ Valuation of Research by Faculty of Color and Majority FacultyStudy of Faculty Worklife at the University of Wisconsin-Madison

27http://wiseli.engr.wisc.edu/initiatives/survey/results/facultypre/profact/interact/summary.htm

Non-majority 1.2x

Faculty who describe their Faculty who describe their research as research as "non-"non-mainstream" mainstream" responded more responded more negatively to all items than negatively to all items than their colleagues doing their colleagues doing "mainstream" "mainstream" researchresearch Workplace Interactions:

The Faculty Worklife survey asked faculty to evaluate the quality of their workplace interactions along five thematic dimensions: respect in the workplace, informal departmental interactions, colleagues' valuation of research, isolation and "fit," and departmental decision-making.

Cause vs. effect?

28Study of Faculty Worklife at the University of Wisconsin-Madison: N = 1,338. Study of Faculty Worklife at the University of Wisconsin-Madison: N = 1,338.

http://wiseli.engr.wisc.edu/initiatives/survey/results/facultypre/profact/interact/summary.htm

WHAT CAN WHAT CAN INDIVIDUALSINDIVIDUALS DO TO OVERCOME ID DO TO OVERCOME ID CHALLENGES?CHALLENGES?

29

CV Publication CV Publication AnnotationAnnotation? PNAS: Authors must indicate their specific contributions to the published work. … Examples of designations include: Designed research Performed research Contributed new reagents or analytic tools Analyzed data Wrote the paper

Nature: “Authors are required to include a statement of responsibility in the manuscript that specifies the contribution of every author.” T.J. and U.H.v.A. designed the study; T.J., E.A.M., M.I., S.M. and P.A.L. performed experiments; T.J., E.A.M., M.I. and S.M. collected and analysed data; M.B., K.F., N.C.D.P., D.M.S., N.v.R. and S.P.W. provided reagents and mice; T.J., E.A.M., M.I. and U.H.v.A. wrote the manuscript; S.M., K.F., S.E.H., T.M. and S.P.W. gave technical support and conceptual advice.

30

Develop a Develop a Focused Focused Research Research StrategyStrategy Draft a research plan

Include several, but not too many, synergistic projects (maybe 3?)

Create a conceptual model/cartoon to help frame and communicate research

Develop a timeline with dates of meetings, deadlines for RFPs, etc.

31

http://walter.arizona.edu/_media/images/nepa_flowchart.gif

Conceptual models as tools Conceptual models as tools for communication across for communication across disciplinesdisciplinesHeemskerk, M., K. Wilson, and M. Pavao-Zuckerman. 2003. Conservation Ecology 7(3): 8. http://www.consecol.org/vol7/iss3/art8/

Planning Can Work

“… postdoctoral scholars who had crafted explicit plans with their adviser at the outset of their appointments were more satisfied with their experience than those who had not. In addition to subjective measures of success, postdoctoral scholars with written plans submitted papers to peer-reviewed journals at a 23%

higher rate first-author papers at a 30% higher rate, and grant proposals at a 25% higher rate than those without written plans.”

From NAS Bias Report 2006: G Davis (2005). Optimizing the Postdoctoral Experience: An Empirical Approach (working paper).

Research Triangle Park, NC: Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society.

WHAT CAN WHAT CAN INSTITUTIONSINSTITUTIONS DO TO BUILD DO TO BUILD INTERDISCIPLINARY INTERDISCIPLINARY CAPACITY?CAPACITY?

34

Diana Rhoten, 2009

Structural PossibilitiesStructural Possibilities

Stability (40-50) with subgroups (10-15 researchers), some flux (<5 yrs), resources, diversity Rhoten, 2003

Centers Bozeman and Corley

Cross-cutting initiatives Columbia Earth Institute

Seminars/journal clubs/lunch! Hollingsworth, 2001

Committee/Vice Provost ID Research, Education, Human Resources

35

36

Search and Hiring: I can't tell you how many times I have reviewed searches in which the people—predominantly women and minority-group members—were not hired, because they didn't “fit”.-Angelica Stacy, Professor of Chemistry and Associate Vice Provost for Faculty Equity, University of California, Berkeley (2006)

“Narrow position specifications also affect the applicant pool and the numbers of women hired. There is mounting evidence that women are choosing to work at the boundaries of disciplines. …

As part of its diversity initiative, UCB has started to hold some full-time equivalent (FTE) faculty positions centrally to encourage groups of faculty and departments to pool resources and propose hires in new multidisciplinary research areas. The University of Wisconsin, Madison and a number of other institutions have similar central-hire or cohire programs based on a commitment to enhance interdisciplinary research.

Those policies counteract the tendency of departments to hire people to fill the mainstream slots, rather than moving the institutions forward into new fields. To accomplish the latter, institutional leadership is important.”

Beyond Bias and Barriers, NAS 2006: p. 5-7,8

CEDD 2007: Interdisciplinary Hiring, Tenure and CEDD 2007: Interdisciplinary Hiring, Tenure and Promotion: Promotion: Guidance for Individuals and InstitutionsGuidance for Individuals and Institutionshttp://www.ncseonline.org/CEDD/cms.cfm?id=2042

LIFE CYCLE: Issues and recommendations

Sample language (case studies)

Links to resources

Structural Considerations

Position creation and institutional acceptance

Search and hiring

Junior development, mentoring and protection

Dossier preparation and evaluation (3rd, 5th year reviews, tenure)

Senior development

Support Multiple Levels of ID Res & Ed

38 Rhoten and Pfirman, 2007a,b

“New directions” sabbaticalsCourse development

Multiple authors, PIsCo-teaching

CentersJoint majors, linked courses

Research practice, applicationsCivic engagement

Intrapersonal: Cognitive Connections

Interpersonal: Collegial Connections

Inter-departmental:Cross-fieldConnections

Stakeholder:Community Connections

Identify Institutional Identify Institutional Commitment to IDRCommitment to IDR

Commitment and Investments

Modest Intermediate Significant

Students and Curriculum

Minor, Gen Ed. Option

Concentration,Special Major

Major, Gen Ed Req.

Administration Committee Center, Program InterdisciplinaryDepartment

Faculty Affiliated Hire in DisciplinaryDepartment,

Adjunct

Off-ladder,Joint Hire

Tenure-track in Interdisciplinary

Department

Research Scientists

Soft-money Support for

Single or Short-term Project

Multi-year Support

Institution-committed Career Interdisciplinary

Research Scientist Line39

Recognize Issues with Recognize Issues with JJoint-oint-Appointment, Junior, Tenure-Appointment, Junior, Tenure-Track Track HiresHires

Even if the chairs are committed and all agreements are put in writing, what happens to the junior hire when the chairs rotate off? Burden on junior hire to figure out how the

units will get along Department does not feel as responsible

for hires sponsored by another source as they do when they invest their own resources at the outset “If they were really good enough, they would

have been hired the regular way”

40

Art Small, III

““You donYou don’’t t adopt a adopt a child to child to

sort sort through through whether whether

or not you or not you want a want a

marriagemarriage””

Women More Likely to Hold Joint Appointments(at UC Berkeley) Women tend to hold joint

appointments in business, biology, law, city and regional planning, economics, and environmental science.

In one of the newer departments, bioengineering, half of the faculty are women.

When the biological sciences were restructured to include broad, multidisciplinary approaches, the proportion of women faculty increased to 50%.

41 Beyond Bias and Barriers, NAS 2006: p. 5-7,8

% STEM Faculty Holding Joint Appointments

Women 1.7x

Cross-Field

Craft Individual MOUsCraft Individual MOUs

Drafted before the search begins

Completed and signed by all for the hire letter

Reviewed at each review stage

Included in the tenure dossier

42

43

Confront the Tenure/Promotion IssueConfront the Tenure/Promotion Issue

Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, 2004, Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, 2004, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public

Policy (COSEPUP) ConvocationPolicy (COSEPUP) Convocation

Maybe Change Tenure Criteria?

Discovery, Integration, Application,

and Teaching

Boyer: Scholarship Reconsidered, Prioritie

s of the Professoriate (1990)

Conclusions

We have responsibilities for the people we hire and teach – need to create a culture, implement procedures and oversight, and allocate and maintain resources that will allow interdisciplinary scholars and

students to thrive and prosper

44