Forensic Science and Cultural Anthropology: Embracing Complexity in an Interdisciplinary Classroom Based Exercise

Interdisciplinary physical education (PE) learning is an innovation that combines other subjects with physical education which is really needed at this time. The purpose of this study is to measure the extent of knowledge and implementation of interdisciplinary PE learning of PE teachers in Indonesia. A descriptive quantitative research method through a survey approach was used in this study. A questionaire instrument related to the implementation and knowledge of interdisciplinary PE was used and distributed to 184 PE teachers in Indonesia (80 in elementary school, 45 in senior high school, and 59 in senior high schools). Data processing was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The research results explained that only 17 PE teachers (21.25%) in elementary schools had ever carried out interdisciplinary PE learning and their average knowledge was 49.6 (enough to know). At junior high school level, only 13 PE teachers (28.9%) had carried out interdisciplinary PE learning with an average knowledge of 60.9 (know). At the high school level, only 3 PE teachers (5%) have ever implemented interdisciplinary PE learning with an average knowledge of 40.8 (enough to know). Overall, only 33 PE teachers (17.9%) have implemented interdisciplinary PE learning with an average knowledge of 49.6, which means they are in the "enough to know" category. Very few PE teachers in Indonesia apply interdisciplinary PE learning and their knowledge of interdisciplinary PE is only limited to knowing enough, this of course needs to be improved considering that interdisciplinary learning is a learning innovation that is really needed nowadays. Keywords: interdisciplinary learning, physical education , learning innovation, pe teacher, subject collaboration.

The importance of engaging students with complex societal challenges has led to the adoption of various interdisciplinary teaching and learning practices in both K-12 and higher education. However, interdisciplinary learning is one of the most complex domains of contemporary educational practice, and, despite its significance, remains significantly undertheorized and under-researched. This Special Issue highlights empirical research efforts toward understanding interdisciplinary learning in its complexity. It simultaneously aims to 1) advance ecological perspectives that encompass concepts and methodologies for studying complex heterogeneous learning practices and 2) apply these perspectives to the research of interdisciplinary learning—of how people learn across and beyond disciplines. This introduction provides a historical context for interdisciplinary learning, introduces an ecological stance toward researching learning across and beyond disciplines, and reviews critical theoretical and methodological challenges within interdisciplinary learning, arguing that the field of the learning sciences is well-positioned to address these challenges. It discusses how the contributions presented in this special issue shed light on theoretical, methodological, empirical, and design aspects of interdisciplinary learning and offer a basis for further design work and research.

The study of objects holds a central place in research on interdisciplinary research practices, yet we know little about the role of objects in facilitating or hindering interdisciplinary learning in higher education. This article develops a pluralist, relational, and dynamic approach to studying the role of objects in interdisciplinary teaching and learning. We document the potential for objects to perform different functions depending on how they are employed and engaged in educational settings. Based on a small, exploratory case study of teaching-learning dynamics at an interdisciplinary MSc course, we examine the roles performed by three very different objects: the dominant object of mixed methods, an interdisciplinary mapping exercise introduced by the teacher, and the spontaneously emerging epistemic object of “perceptions”. We find clear limitations of the dominant mixed-methods approach to interdisciplinarity: while the approach provides a simple and efficient way to organize interdisciplinary collaboration, it risks reinforcing disciplinary boundaries rather than enabling their crossing. Although this gives students the impression of doing interdisciplinary work—and enables them to do so at a relatively superficial level—it simultaneously undercuts the potential for deeper learning. In contrast, we found the “epistemic” object of “perceptions”, that surfaced spontaneously in a student discussion, provided opportunities for transformative understanding across disciplines. We conclude the paper with some reflections on the learning potential of troublesome differences and our role as teachers in balancing improvisation and scaffolding to stimulate deeper interdisciplinary learning beyond mixed methods. In our discussion, we draw upon the concept of threshold concepts to better understand how objects can variously serve as bridges for communication or as portals to more profound interdisciplinary understanding, suggesting new directions for research on objects in teaching and learning contexts.

Can Educational Accreditation Drive Interdisciplinary Learning in the Health Professions?

BackgroundIn order to best prepare medical students for their increasingly complex future career, interdisciplinary higher education is swiftly gaining popularity. However, the implementation of interdisciplinary learning in medical education is challenging. The present study deepens the understanding of the challenges and opportunities inherent to the implementation of an interdisciplinary course. We elucidated the attitudes and beliefs of students participating in a newly developed interdisciplinary minor, in which students of medicine (MS) and communication and information sciences (CISS) were involved.MethodsWe conducted four semi-structured focus group interviews, of which two were held before, and two were held after the course. Seven MS and six CISS participated voluntarily. A pre-arranged interview guide was used. The interviews were recorded and afterwards systematically analyzed with the ‘constant comparative analysis’ technique.ResultsThe focus group interviews revealed three differences in epistemics between students in terms of 1) curriculum content, 2) educational formats and 3) student’s competence perceptions. These factors influenced the way students evaluated themselves, each other and the interdisciplinary course.ConclusionsWe conclude that factors that influence interdisciplinary learning are personal epistemics, individual learning preferences, and the synergy that is achieved throughout interdisciplinary learning. Organizing the dialogue among students of different disciplines could make students aware of inequalities, implicated biases and assigned status of different student groups. These empirical results are crucial to tailor interdisciplinary education to each specific discipline and to take interdisciplinary learning to a higher level of maturity.

Interdisciplinary learning improves cognitive skills and increases motivation for learning and teaching in higher education. Interdisciplinary education, which requires the collaboration of different disciplines, contributes to the development of students by integrating disciplinary knowledge and providing a multidimensional perspective. Thus, interdisciplinary education has become an alternative approach to discipline-centered education in higher education. Interdisciplinary learning is necessary for postmodern life because it eliminates the limitations of disciplinary education. The complex nature of the problems posed by postmodern life requires the collaboration of many disciplines. Current political, economic, social, religious, and legal issues are too complex to be solved from the perspective of a single discipline. Discipline-centered education may not be sufficient to provide solutions to current problems or to equip students with problem-solving skills. For this reason, this study reveals that interdisciplinary learning, which is increasing in higher education, can also be applied to higher religious education. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the outcomes of interdisciplinary learning in higher religious education through a sample training. In the academic year 2023/2024, an interdisciplinary training was conducted on the common problems of theology and other disciplines, and the results were revealed through the views of 16 participants. The research was conducted as a case study by using the qualitative research method, and the research data were coded under four themes: (1) need for interdisciplinary learning in higher religious education, (2) disciplines associated with higher religious education, (3) outcomes of interdisciplinary learning, and (4) suggestions for interdisciplinary education. According to the research findings, the participants believe that courses in higher religious education have interdisciplinary content, that interdisciplinary education is necessary in higher religious education, and that interdisciplinary learning contributes to personal and professional development. It is recommended that studies be carried out using alternative approaches to improve higher religious education.

Interdisciplinary education is a modern term that started to appear in the medical and nursing literature between the late 1960s and early 1970s. Its meaning has changed over time from one profession teaching another, to learning together or from each other in informal settings, to our current, more structured, and formal understanding. In 2001, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) report, To Err is Human, reignited interest in the concept as a way to provide better quality care to the American public. The report identified the need for a common vision across professions that could only be achieved if health professionals learned and worked together in a more defined and structured way.1 Picking up on the recommendations of To Err is Human, the 2003 IOM report, Health Professions Education: The Bridge to Quality further refined the definition of interdisciplinary education. The report suggested that when different disciplines learned together, knowledge and practice changed. The report also recommended formal courses and structured joint clinical experiences as part of an interdisciplinary curriculum.2Recently, interdisciplinary education has become the new magic bullet for improving the quality of care to patients. The Affordable Care Act, the IOM report on the Future of Nursing, as well as multiple reports and workshops have used the idea of working in teams as a proxy for interdisciplinary care, and indirectly, reinforced the need for interdisciplinary education.3 Although the concept is typically nested in the relationships of nurses and physicians, in its broadest and perhaps most usable form, interdisciplinary education should encompass multiple providers of health services, such as social workers, physician assistants, and physical therapists, and the patient.4 Even so, in this article I will focus on interdisciplinary learning (rather than formal education) between nurses and physicians and will use historical examples from my earlier work on critical care nurses and nurse practitioners to illustrate how interdisciplinary learning is an historical idea that has been reshaped to meet modern health-care concerns.5From an historical vantage point, interdisciplinary learning is not a new idea. Nurses and doctors learned from each other across time and place. They practiced together on an informal basis sometimes out of necessity, other times out of preference. There are many examples, and a number of common themes emerge that characterize informal interdisciplinary learning: The process could be multidirectional even in the presence of power differentials, learning was opportunistic and time and place dependent, and it was risky. Intentions of interdisciplinary learning also differed, sometimes significantly, from reality.Multidirectional LearningThe early intensive care units of the 1950s fostered multidirectional learning- physicians learned from nurses and nurses learned from physicians, sometimes individually and sometimes as a group. The units were small spaces where physicians and nurses worked closely together both spatially and intellectually. Nurses and physicians sat together and learned how to read electrocardiograms, interpret laboratory studies, and associate what they saw on the tracings and reports to the status of the patient in the bed. Physicians learned firsthand how nurses could determine a change in patient status without looking at the monitors, how nurses worked, what they did, and how they managed patients. As nurses learned how to read cardiac tracings, they also taught physicians how to think about stress and how to evaluate a patient's pain. These informal learning sessions were critical in an environment rapidly integrating new therapies and providers experimenting to see what new drugs and treatments would do. Having the data on treatment response and accurate patient updates helped nurses and physicians develop a sense of trust and logistical capability to give patients the care they needed. …

“Interdisciplinary Pedagogies in Higher Education” explores the increasing integration of goals for interdisciplinary learning in American higher education. The chapter begins with working definitions of interdisciplinary learning and the many factors that have led to its proliferation. It then reviews the elaboration of new methods to teach and to assess interdisciplinary learning, emerging models of interdisciplinary problem-solving, and practice-oriented resources and online tools to assist undergraduate, graduate, and professional students and their instructors with interdisciplinary problem-solving and communications in cross-disciplinary and interprofessional contexts. The chapter concludes with the impact of technology, for example, e-portfolios and other digital and technology-enabled tools, and evidence of an emerging body of scholarship of teaching and learning focused on interdisciplinary learning.

This study aims to describe the history of interdisciplinary education and the current trends and to elucidate the conceptual framework and values that support interdisciplinary science teaching. Many science educators have perceived the necessity for a crucial paradigm shift towards interdisciplinary learning as shown in science standards. Interdisciplinary learning in science is characterized as a perspective that integrates two or more disciplines into coherent connections to enable students to make relevant connections and generate meaningful associations. There is no question that the complexity of the natural system and its corresponding scientific problems necessitate interdisciplinary understanding informed by multiple disciplinary backgrounds. The best way to learn and perceive natural phenomena of the real world in science should be based on an effective interdisciplinary teaching. To support the underlying rationale for interdisciplinary teaching, the present study proposes theoretical approaches on how integrated knowledge of teachers affects their interdisciplinary teaching practices and student learning. This research further emphasizes a need for appropriate professional development programs that can foster the interdisciplinary understanding across various science disciplines.

One of the aims of Curriculum for Excellence (CfE) in Scotland is greater inclusion of interdisciplinary learning and teaching in school education. There is, arguably, a limited amount of guidance in the CfE literature to advise and support secondary teachers in the practical implications of the planning, preparation and implementation of interdisciplinary learning and teaching. This paper examines this guidance and insights from research literature and presents the findings from a research project, Searching for Meaning, which focused on science and religious education teachers collaborating in planned interdisciplinary learning and teaching in secondary schools. The paper identifies some of the key factors for effective interdisciplinary learning and teaching between science and religious education. These include: support from the school leadership; openness to interdisciplinary work and willingness to learn about other disciplines; teamwork, dialogue and joint planning and the need for time and support for teachers. These findings are potentially significant for other forms of interdisciplinary learning and teaching.

Dance is often positioned in contrast to more “academic” disciplines. Its marginalized status in pre-collegiate education means that it is too often absent from schooling. When taught at all, it is often used for the purpose of increasing student engagement or advancing understanding in another subject. In such a role, the standards, concepts, and methods of dance are not usually upheld. An alternative approach to combining dance with another subject can be found in interdisciplinary learning where dance and another discipline are brought together, with each discipline equally valued for its contribution to understanding a complex topic. The two disciplines come together to complement and challenge each other, and to provide insights into a multifaceted phenomenon that cannot adequately be understood through a single disciplinary perspective. This article introduces a framework for interdisciplinary teaching and learning, grounds it in a portrait of practice at the intersection of dance and anthropology, and explores the role of dance in this type of integration. Simply stated, interdisciplinary education, as proposed here, provides unique opportunities for learning about dance as well as through dance.

Problem-based learning is often characterised as an approach encompassing interdisciplinary learning; however, little attention has been explicitly paid to what a claim of interdisciplinary problem-based learning means in practice. Even less attention has been given to address the consequences of interdisciplinary problem-based learning for students, teachers and institutions of higher education. This article examines the intentions and principles of interdisciplinary learning and problem-based learning, respectively. This examination reveals considerable overlaps of the two perspectives which, it is argued, make problem-based learning a potentially compelling pedagogical practice conducive for students’ learning across disciplines. The second part of this article addresses three distinct barriers which need to be addressed in order to realise the potentials of interdisciplinary learning in problem-based settings. These barriers are related to the organisation of curriculum, developing student competencies to navigate with interdisciplinary problems and developing teacher competencies to meet student’s needs. The conclusion is that interdisciplinary learning cannot be taken for granted in problem-based settings, and only if issues of interdisciplinary learning are specifically addressed can problem-based learning be considered a pedagogical approach adequately scaffolding interdisciplinary learning in higher education. Consequently, more research is needed to fully comprehend the potentials of problem-based learning as conducive for interdisciplinary learning. Particularly, research into the scaffolding of interdisciplinary learning in problem-based learning is required.

Key Issues: Interdisciplinary learning and education is about the interactiveness of the learning encounter between professionals and non-professionally affiliated staff, service users and carers. It involves learning with, from and about each other with the explicit aim to improve collaboration and the quality of care. The need for interprofessional education has been supported by a raft of policy developments since the mid 1990s. Interprofessional education becomes interdisciplinary when service users, carers and non-professionally affiliated groups in the workforce interact with professionals to learn with, from and about each other to improve collaboration and the quality of care delivered. Interdisciplinary learning needs to be planned, designed and delivered with the explicit aim of enhancing collaborative practice.

Interdisciplinary higher education is becoming more important in learning across subject boundaries. This is occurring in global, national and institutional contexts. In Malaysia, interdisciplinarity is clear in the country's National Higher Education Strategic Plan (2007). While varying interpretations of interdisciplinary learning and teaching exist, there are also commonalities. These common elements address complex problems and focus questions by drawing on the disciplines. They also integrate insights and produce new understandings of complex problems. In this chapter, 21 senior administrators (deans, deputy deans and program chairs) from three public universities in Malaysia were surveyed, and 10 respondents were interviewed to determine their views on their use of the interdisciplinary approach: that is, their level of awareness, their perceptions of interdisciplinarity, and their self-reported level of knowledge of what interdisciplinarity means. The findings showed that 76% of the respondents were aware of interdisciplinarity, and that most respondents had a ‘moderately sufficient’ level of self-reported knowledge about the application of interdisciplinarity in current courses. The interview sessions also revealed that respondents interpreted the interdisciplinary approach in different ways. The implications of the results from this exploratory study suggest that public universities in Malaysia have various obstacles to deal with before effective interdisciplinary learning and teaching can be implemented.

Scholarship on interdisciplinary teaching and learning, especially in the humanities, is scarce, and it rarely takes teachers’ and principals’ views into account. To address these gaps, we present findings from interviews conducted with teachers and principals who were engaged in developing and enacting interdisciplinary curricula in the humanities. These respondents described interdisciplinarity as an innovation that can affect discourse within the classroom, teacher professional identity, and school management. Their views transcended the theoretical distinctions between cognitive, sociocultural, and critical learning theories that typically feature in educational research on interdisciplinary teaching and learning in the humanities. Understanding the gaps between the current state of the academic literature on interdisciplinary teaching and learning and teachers’ and principals’ views on this issue can inform pre-service and in-service teacher training initiatives.