Abstract
AbstractWe review a selection of published reports on the evaluation and wider peer-review of interdisciplinary research (IDR), drawing on an in-depth examination of a range of interdisciplinary projects and the work of a UK-based working group of funders and researchers. Our aim is to elucidate best practice. We focus the study on integrative, interdisciplinary projects, rather than those at the level of “multidisciplinary dialogue”. Five areas of evaluation (publishing, research grants, careers, IDR centres, institutions) demonstrate both commonality and difference in the task of measuring added value in IDR collaborations. We find that, although single-discipline peer review processes are poorly suited to address IDR, a framework that starts with the assumption that IDR is a fundamental academic research practice is effective for single-discipline evaluation as well. This article is published as part of a collection on interdisciplinarity.
Highlights
Interdisciplinary research (IDR) is widely praised for its capacity to address “wicked problems”, transform and reshape the academic landscape in imaginative ways, re-integrate a fragmented world of learning, and even transform disciplines themselves
In the following discussion we adopt Giddens’ helpful definition: Interdisciplinary research (IDR) is a mode of research by teams or individuals that integrates information, data, techniques, tools, perspectives, concepts, and/or theories from two or more disciplines or bodies of specialized knowledge to advance fundamental understanding or to solve problems whose solutions are beyond the scope of a single discipline or field of research practice. (Land, 2011: 7, citing Giddens, 1991)
Several collections of essays theorize IDR, and explore non-summative and modal concepts of interdisciplinarity (Barry and Born, 2013; Callard and Fitzgerald, 2015). In this instance we will focus on the most transformed mode of IDR—the deeply integrative category in which disciplines move beyond a polyphonic discourse or empirical comparison to create new ways of approaching research questions (National Academy of Sciences, 2010)
Summary
Interdisciplinary research (IDR) is widely praised for its capacity to address “wicked problems”, transform and reshape the academic landscape in imaginative ways, re-integrate a fragmented world of learning, and even transform disciplines themselves. Several collections of essays theorize IDR, and explore non-summative and modal concepts of interdisciplinarity (Barry and Born, 2013; Callard and Fitzgerald, 2015). In this instance we will focus on the most transformed (and arguably transformative) mode of IDR—the deeply integrative category (whether this is motivated by external problems as Giddens suggests, or by an internal academic imperative) in which disciplines move beyond a polyphonic discourse or empirical comparison to create new ways of approaching research questions (National Academy of Sciences, 2010). The imperative of finding solutions to this problem is another driver of our choice of focus on integrative IDR—for this mode of conducting research is the least responsive to single-disciplinary views, and the most challenging to evaluate
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
