Interdisciplinarity as Academic Accountability: Prospects for Quality Control Across Disciplinary Boundaries
Interdisciplinarity as Academic Accountability: Prospects for Quality Control Across Disciplinary Boundaries
复制标题
作为学术责任的跨学科性：跨学科边界的质量控制前景
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
K. Huutoniemi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
K. Huutoniemi
两个主要的科学政策问题是跨学科知识的整合和科学对社会的责任。我认为，与其增加新的或外部的研究评估标准，这些目标可以通过使学科优先级和程序受到学术界其他人更广泛的审查来实现。本文从社会认识论的视角，探讨跨学科性作为一种跨学科界限的认识问责模式，它承诺使学术超越其学科部分的总和。基于对知识生产中的跨学科和问责的讨论，以及对研究建议评估的实证研究结果，本文将学术问责的概念分解为三个维度：问责的接受者、内容和实践，并说明了跨学科在每个维度上的差异。分析表明，跨学科性不仅仅是一个研究范畴，而是涉及到一个协调，控制和学科知识体系之间的妥协的社会认识机制。这种跨学科的框架阐明了它在改变科学治理中的作用，同时解决了关于其在研究评估中的意义的核心争议。
Two major science policy issues are the integration of knowledge across academic disciplines and the accountability of science to society. Instead of adding new or external criteria for research evaluation, I argue, these goals can be pursued by subjecting disciplinary priorities and procedures to broader scrutiny from the rest of academia. From a social epistemological perspective, the paper discusses interdisciplinarity as a mode of epistemic accountability across disciplinary boundaries, which promises to make academia more than the sum of its disciplinary parts. Drawing on discussions of interdisciplinarity and accountability in knowledge production, as well as on empirical findings of the evaluation of research proposals, the paper unpacks the notion of academic accountability into three dimensions—the recipients, contents, and practices of accountability—and illustrates the difference interdisciplinarity makes in each dimension. The analysis shows that interdisciplinarity is not simply a category of research, but involves a social epistemic mechanism of coordination, control, and compromise between disciplinary regimes of knowledge. This framing of interdisciplinarity clarifies its role in the changing governance of science while simultaneously solving central controversies over its meaning in research evaluation.