Developing interdisciplinary research graduates: educational opportunities and dilemmas

Attempting to solve the complex problems of the 21st century requires research graduates that have developed a sophisticated array of interdisciplinary teamwork and communication skills. Although universities, governments, industry and the professions have emphasised the need to break down disciplinary silos in order to produce graduates, who can respond more effectively to the needs of the knowledge economy, much of this work has centred on undergraduate programs. While there are some research higher degree students who choose to work on interdisciplinary research topics, very little has been done to develop interdisciplinary research education systematically. This paper explores the educational opportunities and dilemmas involved in developing systematic programs of interdisciplinary research activities in two research centres at the University of Queensland. Framed by Bruhn's (2000, p. 58) theoretical discourse about interdisciplinary research as 'a philosophy, an art form, an artifact, and an antidote', this paper emphasises the need for such programs to embed the development of students' interdisciplinary research skills and attitudes within their research projects. The two diverse programs also emphasise experiential, active and interactive learning techniques and are centred upon the development of students' reflective practice skills.

Imagining an interdisciplinary doctoral pedagogy

There has been a great deal of discussion about the need for interdisciplinary, applied research to service the needs of the knowledge economy and to solve the broader complex theoretical problems of the twenty-first century. This is known as 'Mode 2' knowledge production. Yet, university research higher degree programs continue to be largely disciplinary-based. While there has been a rise in the number of research students working on industry-related, applied projects, very few research students gain exposure to interdisciplinary research processes. This paper explores several examples of interdisciplinary doctoral programs based in North America and Australia and seeks to draw upon examples of undergraduate interdisciplinary learning and epistemology. In reviewing this theoretical work and a number of strategies implemented at an Australian university, the paper begins to imagine an interdisciplinary doctoral pedagogy.

Ecological-economic modeling for biodiversity management: Potential, pitfalls, and prospects

Ecologists and economists both use models to help develop strategies for biodiversity management. The practical use of disciplinary models, however, can be limited because ecological models tend not to address the socioeconomic dimension of biodiversity management, whereas economic models tend to neglect the ecological dimension. Given these shortcomings of disciplinary models, there is a necessity to combine ecological and economic knowledge into ecological-economic models. It is insufficient if scientists work separately in their own disciplines and combine their knowledge only when it comes to formulating management recommendations. Such an approach does not capture feedback loops between the ecological and the socioeconomic systems. Furthermore, each discipline poses the management problem in its own way and comes up with its own most appropriate solution. These disciplinary solutions, however are likely to be so different that a combined solution considering aspects of both disciplines cannot be found. Preconditions for a successful model-based integration of ecology and economics include (1) an in-depth knowledge of the two disciplines, (2) the adequate identification and framing of the problem to be investigated, and (3) a common understanding between economists and ecologists of modeling and scale. To further advance ecological-economic modeling the development of common benchmarks, quality controls, and refereeing standards for ecological-economic models is desirable.

Prometheus unbound: 20 years of communication policy research

In this article I review 20 years of writing on communication policy in Prometheus. I examine the contribution Prometheus has made to three areas of knowledge about communication policy: communication itself, its histories, and broad notions of communication policy; telecommunications; and new communication technology. I suggest that it is in the latter two areas focusing on the technological dimensions of communication policy, that the journal has consistently contributed genuinely innovative work. Here the journal has fostered interdisciplinary writing and enquiry where policy and technology developments most required critique and new ideas.

Making the link between engineering management and undergraduate research

This paper describes and analyses an innovative engineering management course that applies a project management framework in the context of a feasibility study for a prospective research project. The aim is to have students learn aspects of management that will be relevant from the outset of their professional career while simultaneously having immediate value in helping them to manage a research project and capstone design project in their senior year. An integral part of this innovation was the development of a web-based project management tool. While the main objectives of the new course design were achieved, a number of important lessons were learned that would guide the further development and continuous improvement of this course. The most critical of these is the need to achieve the optimum balance in the mind of the students between doing the project and critically analyzing the processes used to accomplish the work.

Dilemmas in Framing Research Studies in Engineering Education

There has been considerable debate about the need for more empirical, evidence based studies of the impact of various interventions and practices in engineering education. A number of resources including workshops to guide engineering faculty in the conduct of such studies have emerged over recent years. This paper presents a critique of the evolution of engineering education research and its underlying assumptions in the context of the systemic reform currently underway in engineering education. This critique leads to an analysis of the ways in which our current understanding of engineering, engineering education and research in engineering education is shaped by the traditions and cultural characteristics of the profession and grounded, albeit implicitly, in a particular suite of epistemological assumptions. It is argued that the whole enterprise of engineering education needs to be radically reconceptualized. A pluralistic approach to framing scholarship in engineering education is then proposed based on the principles of demonstrable practicality, critical interdisciplinarity and holistic reflexivity. This new framework has implications for engaging and developing faculty in the context of new teaching and learning paradigms, for the evaluation of the scholarship of teaching and for the research-teaching nexus.